If you like the decisions issued by Justice Richard Sanders, I suggest you check out his recent dissent in State v. Ish (Docket No. 83308-7).
Sanders would have reversed the conviction of an admitted murderer based upon the trial judge allowing the prosecutor to mention that one of the state’s witnesses had promised to tell the truth. Seven justices faulted the prosecutor for “vouching for the witness” by this reference but found the error harmless. One justice saw no error at all. Only Sanders found the “error” so harmful as to require reversal.