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
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2051946-1-II%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

1,702 chars

of a limiting instruction” if the defendants proposed such an instruction, “perhaps identifying the

documents that the jury may only consider for a limiting purpose . . . that pertain to certain

transactions, documents pertaining to a particular credit union or a bank perhaps to clue the jury

in as to the limited purpose of those documents.” 7 RP at 951-52.

Defense counsel did not request a limiting instruction regarding the documentary

evidence of James’s financial transactions, and no instruction regarding that evidence was given.

Defense counsel also did not request a limiting instruction on the prosecutor’s use of the

statements in James’s plea agreement to impeach him, and no instruction regarding those

statements was given.

18
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 51946-1-II

Also following James’s testimony, Broussard’s attorney served James’s former attorney

with a subpoena to testify regarding the circumstances surrounding the drafting of James’s

statements in the guilty plea. Smith joined in the request to have James’s former attorney testify.

The Department of Assigned Counsel moved to quash the subpoena.

Smith and Broussard argued that in attempting to impeach James using prior inconsistent

statements from his plea, the prosecutor had read James’s prior statements into the record. They

wanted to call James’s former attorney to testify that the language in James’s plea statement

came not from James himself, but from an email from the prosecutor. The trial court quashed

the warrant.

Imposition of Criminal Filing Fee

At sentencing, the trial court imposed legal financial obligations (LFOs), including a