State v. Castillo-Murcia

¶1 Maximino Castillo-Murcia appeals his convictions for luring, communicating with a minor for immoral purposes, and indecent exposure. Mr. Castillo-Murcia contends (1) insufficient evidence supports the “unknown” element of RCW 9A.40.090(l)(c) to establish luring and (2) his jury waiver is invalid. We disagree with both contentions and affirm.

FACTS

¶2 On April 17, 2013, 13-year-old J.M.A.-H. was playing basketball in a Kennewick, Washington, park with M.S. and H.A. Mr. Castillo-Murcia, an ice cream truck operator, drove to the park. J.M.A.-H. recognized Mr. Castillo-Murcia as the ice cream…