Legal Opinion

State v. Trout

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided January 25, 2005No. 21633-1-IIIPublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 — This appeal follows a jury’s finding of guilty for two counts of first degree robbery and one count of second degree assault. Adam Trout challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support accomplice liability, essentially because the object of the intended robbery and assault changed between the time it was planned, in his apartment, and when it occurred. This record amply supports the jury’s finding of guilt based on his participation in these crimes, before, during, and after. He also assigns error to the trial court’s conclusion that his statement to police was voluntary. The trial…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. State v. SalinasWashington Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. StensonWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State v. StensonWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State v. DelmarterWashington Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State v. BorsheimCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  2. State v. BorsheimCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  3. State v. LeydaWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State v. LeydaWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. TruongCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012

11 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