Legal Opinion

State v. Pope

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided March 24, 2000No. Nos. 23273-1-II; 23714-8-IIPublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHoughton, J.

— Michael Pope and Monte Robin Kaija, Jr., the defendants in these linked cases, appeal convictions of bail jumping for failure to appear at probation violation hearings. Pope and Kaija both claim that the bail jumping statute does not apply in this context. Kaija also argues that the jury instructions in his case were deficient. Because we hold that the bail jumping statute applies, we affirm Pope’s conviction. Because we hold that Kaija’s “to *626convict” instruction lacked an essential element, we reverse Kaija’s conviction.

FACTS

Michael Pope

Michael Pope was convicted of a class B felony in…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State v. ScottWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State v. BergeronWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  3. State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State v. ByrdWashington Supreme Court · 1995

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. State v. DeRykeWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  4. State v. DeRykeWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  5. State v. PopeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API