Legal Opinion

State v. Watkins

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 18, 2006No. 56507-9-IPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 Jury instructions must more than adequately convey the law. They must make the relevant legal standard “ ‘manifestly apparent to the average juror.’ ” 1 Here, the unanimity instruction given to the jury arguably does not meet this standard. But we are bound by precedent from the Supreme Court that expressly approves the unanimity instruction given in this case. Accordingly, we must reject the argument of Jermaine Watkins that the instruction in this case failed to protect his constitutional right to a unanimous jury. There being no other basis to reverse, we affirm the judgment and…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. PetrichWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  3. State v. KitchenWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. LevyWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. LevyWashington Supreme Court · 2006

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. CarsonWashington Supreme Court · 2015
  2. State v. BergCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  3. State v. BorsheimCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  4. State v. BorsheimCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  5. Personal Restraint Petition Of Tommy Lee Crow, Jr.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2015

5 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