In re the Welfare of Wilson
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Per curiam
Appellant seeks review of a juvenile court finding that he was guilty of the crime of reckless endangerment (RCW 9A.36.050). The court found that appellant was an accomplice as provided in RCW 9A.08.020.1 Appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support *106the finding.2
In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, this court must assume the truth of the State's evidence and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the State. State v. Pristell, 3 Wn. App. 962, 478 P.2d 743 (1970); State v. Braxton, 10 Wn. App. 1, 516 P.2d 771 (1973). We will not disturb the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. DrakeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Plancich v. WilliamsonWashington Supreme Court · 1960
- State v. BraxtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1973
- State v. PristellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1970
- State v. KaneWashington Supreme Court · 1967
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re the Welfare of WilsonWashington Supreme Court · 1979
- State v. EatonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1978
- State v. D. H.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1982