Legal Opinion

State v. Jackson

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 8, 1997No. 35179-6-I, 35208-3-IPublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*804Webster, J.

Parents have a duty to care for and protect their children.1 They can be held criminally liable as principals when, for example, they harm their child by failing to seek necessary medical care.2 In this appeal, we address a parent’s duty to protect in the context of accomplice liability. Instead of utilizing the pattern accomplice instruction, the trial court instructed the jury that it could find a parent to be an accomplice to a crime against the child, if, although physically capable, the parent failed to come to her aid. So instructed, the jury found both defendants guilty of…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. United States v. GaudinSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. Yates v. EvattSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Pope v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. HughesWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. HughesWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. State v. JacksonWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State v. BerubeWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  5. State v. BerubeWashington Supreme Court · 2003

13 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