Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 51946-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
Full Text
1,733 charsDIVISION II STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 51946-1-II Respondent. vs. PART PUBLISHED OPINION ANTHONY JERROD SMITH, Appellant. MAXA, P.J. – Anthony Smith appeals his convictions of one count of first degree theft, two counts of forgery, and one count of money laundering. Smith’s convictions arose from his involvement in certain transactions with his half-brothers, Derek James and Adrian Broussard. The transactions involved creating auto dealer businesses and using invalid social security numbers to obtain loans from credit unions to purchase cars from the auto dealers. The men then would deposit the loan amount into a bank account for one of the auto dealer businesses but would not actually complete the car sale. Smith created an auto dealer business and opened a business banking account for that business using a social security number belonging to another person. James obtained a loan from a credit union to purchase a car from Smith’s business. The credit union issued a check payable to Smith’s business, which was deposited into the business’s bank account. Two days later, Smith opened another business banking account using the same social security number and transferred the funds from the credit union loan in the first account to that new account. Shortly 1 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 51946-1-II afterward, Smith withdrew nearly all the funds from the new account. There was no indication that James ever purchased the car for which he obtained the loan. In the published portion of this opinion, we hold that (1) the evidence was sufficient to convict Smith of the two counts of forgery because there was evidence that his two bank account