State v. Becklin

¶23 (dissenting) — I would have us affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals. I reach that conclusion because I entirely agree with the Court of Appeals that the challenged supplemental jury instruction came too late and, in addition, was entirely inadequate.

Alexander, C.J.

*531¶24 Insofar as the lateness of the jury instruction is concerned, the Court of Appeals correctly observed that “supplemental instructions may not go beyond matters that either had been, or could have been, properly argued.” State v. Becklin, 133 Wn. App. 610, 620, 137 P.3d 882 (2006) (citing State v. Ransom, 56 Wn. App.…