David Stevens

David Stevens submitted an official comment opposing proposed Washington court-rule amendments that would favor summonses and restrict pretrial detention. He argued that trial judges need discretion to detain defendants who pose flight or public-safety risks and that the proposal conflicted with the state constitution and statutes.

April 27, 2026Supports Public Safety and Crime Control

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

In his official rule comment, David Stevens criticized Washington's GR 37 restrictions on peremptory challenges, objected to race-conscious treatment in jury selection, and rejected the premise of systemic racism used to support the rule.

April 27, 2026Opposes Civil Rights

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

The Washington State Republican Party recommended David Stevens for Washington Supreme Court Position 3, describing him as a strict constitutionalist and opposing what it called judicial activism.

April 15, 2026

Source: thedailyworld.com · researched July 13, 2026

Judge David Stevens changed a murder defendant's detention from no bail to $250,000 bail with GPS monitoring, over a prosecutor's request for no bail or $2.5 million. The defendant posted bail, and the victim's mother publicly criticized the decision and expressed concern for her safety.

February 24, 2026

Source: fox13seattle.com · researched July 13, 2026

David Stevens was counsel for the State in State v. Knapp. The Washington Court of Appeals reversed a first-degree-theft conviction because bank records were admitted without a qualified witness; the opinion also noted that the State conceded evidentiary error and filed no response brief.

December 24, 2019

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

David Stevens represented the State in State v. Mowen. The Washington Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the restitution order because the trial court improperly limited cross-examination about whether the claimed losses resulted from the charged crime.

January 22, 2019

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

As an Okanogan County prosecutor, David Stevens represented the State in State v. Cate. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions but remanded for resentencing with a jointly calculated offender score and reconsideration of certain legal-financial obligations.

January 22, 2019

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

David Stevens described himself as a strict constructionist, saying judges should stop when statutory text is unambiguous and should rely on the statute and precedent rather than legislators' later explanations. He also criticized Washington Supreme Court rulemaking as ideological.

July 5, 2026Favorable on Impartiality

Source: spokesman.com · researched July 13, 2026

David Stevens described himself as a strict constructionist, saying judges should stop when statutory text is unambiguous and should rely on the statute and precedent rather than legislators' later explanations. He also criticized Washington Supreme Court rulemaking as ideological.

July 5, 2026Favorable on Legal Competence

Source: spokesman.com · researched July 13, 2026

In the same official rule comment, David Stevens argued that broad bail-policy changes should be made by the Legislature rather than through court rules and that judges must follow enacted constitutional and statutory limits.

April 27, 2026Favorable on Legal Competence

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

David Stevens submitted an official comment opposing proposed Washington court-rule amendments that would favor summonses and restrict pretrial detention. He argued that trial judges need discretion to detain defendants who pose flight or public-safety risks and that the proposal conflicted with the state constitution and statutes.

April 27, 2026Favorable on Legal Competence

Source: courts.wa.gov · researched July 13, 2026

Judge David Stevens denied a mandamus petition challenging a Mason County District Court judge's appointment of private counsel when no public defender was available. Stevens called the failure to ask the lawyer before appointing him 'bad form' but held that the appointment was lawful.

April 22, 2024Favorable on Legal Competence

Source: masoncounty.com · researched July 13, 2026