State v. Becklin
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 The crime of stalking as defined by the legislature in RCW 9A.46.110(1) cannot be accomplished through a third party. The State argued an accomplice liability theory in closing argument but did not offer an accomplice instruction before deliberations. In response to an inquiry during jury deliberations, the trial court instructed the panel that stalking could be accomplished through a third party. Because the instruction was both too late and an incorrect statement of the law, we reverse the defendant’s stalking conviction.
Schultheis, J.
FACTS
¶2 Mary McGee Ash and Andre Paul Becklin had a…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- State v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. BrettWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. J.M.Washington Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. DavenportWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. SteinWashington Supreme Court · 2001
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. BecklinWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. BecklinWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. BecklinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006
- State v. BecklinWashington Supreme Court · 2008