State v. Hoeldt

¶1 — Robbie Hoeldt appeals his conviction for second degree assault with a deadly weapon based on his pit bull’s attack on a police officer. He argues that the State failed to prove that his pit bull was a “deadly weapon.” Hoeldt also argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the police officer’s testimony that Hoeldt intended the dog to attack by giving a hand motion. We hold that the dog, as used, fits the statutory definition of *227a “deadly weapon” and that the officer’s testimony was not error. Accordingly, we affirm.

Armstrong, J.

*227FACTS

¶2 Vancouver Police Detective…