State v. Queen
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Walterskirchen, J. †
This is an appeal from a conviction and sentence for indecent exposure, RCW 9.79.080. New counsel was appointed to represent appellant in this court. He makes two assignments of error: (a) that appellant was denied effective assistance of counsel, and (b) that the court erred in instructing the jury that
[I]n connection with the crime of indecent exposure, willfulness and intent are not necessary elements to constitute the offense; the mere doing of the act constitutes the crime.
Appellant’s retained trial counsel took no exception to the court’s instruction. It, therefore,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- State v. BrittonWashington Supreme Court · 1947
- State v. PicheWashington Supreme Court · 1967
- State v. GriffithWashington Supreme Court · 1958
- State v. GalbreathWashington Supreme Court · 1966
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State v. NgWashington Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. NistWashington Supreme Court · 1969
- State v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1976
- State v. RobinsonWashington Supreme Court · 1979
- State v. GilmoreWashington Supreme Court · 1969
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.