permissive inference instruction in Washington

2021The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that “‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, 27 No. 80396-4-I/28 and, . . . he fails to do so, — the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’” State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Davis, 73 Wn.2d 271, 276 , 438 P.2d 185 (1968), overruled on other grounds by State v. Abdulle, 174 Wn.2d 411 , 275 P.3d 1113 (2012)).

2021The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that “‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, 27 No. 80396-4-I/28 and, . . . he fails to do so, — the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’” State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Davis, 73 Wn.2d 271, 276 , 438 P.2d 185 (1968), overruled on other grounds by State v. Abdulle, 174 Wn.2d 411 , 275 P.3d 1113 (2012)).

1999Ed. 2d 777 (1979) (quoting Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6, 36 , 89 S. Ct. 1532 , 23 L.

1999Ed. 2d 777 (1979) (quoting Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6, 36 , 89 S. Ct. 1532 , 23 L.

2021The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that “‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, 27 No. 80396-4-I/28 and, . . . he fails to do so, — the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’” State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Davis, 73 Wn.2d 271, 276 , 438 P.2d 185 (1968), overruled on other grounds by State v. Abdulle, 174 Wn.2d 411 , 275 P.3d 1113 (2012)).

2021The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that “‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, 27 No. 80396-4-I/28 and, . . . he fails to do so, — the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’” State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Davis, 73 Wn.2d 271, 276 , 438 P.2d 185 (1968), overruled on other grounds by State v. Abdulle, 174 Wn.2d 411 , 275 P.3d 1113 (2012)).

2019Although a judge may be restricted from guiding jurors’ assessments of the facts, “[n]othing forbids a jury . . . from logically inferring intent from proven facts, so long as it is satisfied the state has proved that intent beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 709 .

2019Although a judge may be restricted from guiding jurors’ assessments of the facts, “[n]othing forbids a jury . . . from logically inferring intent from proven facts, so long as it is satisfied the state has proved that intent beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 709 .

2009Hanna, 87 F.3d at 1037; Schwendeman, 971 F.2d at 316 ; Randhawa, 133 Wn.2d at 78 .

2007But Randhawa is a vehicular homicide case in which the court held that a trial court may not give a permissive inference instruction that relieves the State of its burden of proving every element of a crime. 133 Wn.2d at 76-77 .

2009In this case, however, the permissive inference instruction did not similarly permit the jury to infer knowledge to the exclusion of evidence to the contrary. ¶44 Further, the permissive inference instruction given herein does not suffer from the same flaw as that at issue in State v. Shipp, 93 Wn.2d 510, 514-15 , 610 P.2d 1322 (1980), a case to which Garbaccio also cites.

2009In this case, however, the permissive inference instruction did not similarly permit the jury to infer knowledge to the exclusion of evidence to the contrary. ¶44 Further, the permissive inference instruction given herein does not suffer from the same flaw as that at issue in State v. Shipp, 93 Wn.2d 510, 514-15 , 610 P.2d 1322 (1980), a case to which Garbaccio also cites.

1997We indicated, further, that the determination of whether a permissive inference instruction meets that standard must be done on a "case-by-case basis in light of the particular evidence presented to the jury in each case.” Hanna, 123 Wn.2d at 712 (citing Ulster, 442 U.S. at 162-63 , 165 and Schwendeman v. Wallenstein, 971 F.2d 313, 316 (9th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1052 (1993)).

1997We indicated, further, that the determination of whether a permissive inference instruction meets that standard must be done on a "case-by-case basis in light of the particular evidence presented to the jury in each case." Hanna, 123 Wash.2d at 712 , 871 P.2d 135 (citing Ulster, 442 U.S. at 162-63, 165 , 99 S.Ct. at 2227-28 , 2228-29 and Schwendeman v. Wallenstein, 971 F.2d 313, 316 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1052 , 113 S.Ct. 975 , 122 L.Ed.2d 130 (1993)).

2025Servs., Inc., 2 Wn.3d 36, 50 , 534 P.3d 339 (2023) (explaining that Washington courts generally follow the rule of party presentation). 9 No. 58906-1-II “A permissive inference or presumption permits, but does not require, the jury to infer an element of the offense, an ‘elemental’ or ‘presumed’ fact, from an ‘evidentiary’ or ‘proved’ fact.” State v. Hanna, 123 Wn.2d 704, 710 , 871 P.2d 135 (1994).

2025Servs., Inc., 2 Wn.3d 36, 50 , 534 P.3d 339 (2023) (explaining that Washington courts generally follow the rule of party presentation). 9 No. 58906-1-II “A permissive inference or presumption permits, but does not require, the jury to infer an element of the offense, an ‘elemental’ or ‘presumed’ fact, from an ‘evidentiary’ or ‘proved’ fact.” State v. Hanna, 123 Wn.2d 704, 710 , 871 P.2d 135 (1994).

2024“The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that ‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, and, ... he fails to do so,—the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’ ” State v. Derri, 17 Wn.

2024App. 2d 376, 404 , 486 P.3d 901 (2021) (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991)), aff’d but criticized, 199 Wn.2d 658 , 511 P.3d 1267 (2022).

2021App. 1 , 94 P.3d 323 (2004). 10 No. 80195-3-I/11 house?” and the defendant responded by saying, “Who are you?” and shoved the owner.29 The State charged the defendant with first degree burglary, and the trial court gave a permissive inference instruction.

2021The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that “‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, 27 No. 80396-4-I/28 and, . . . he fails to do so, — the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’” State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Davis, 73 Wn.2d 271, 276 , 438 P.2d 185 (1968), overruled on other grounds by State v. Abdulle, 174 Wn.2d 411 , 275 P.3d 1113 (2012)).

2021The missing evidence instruction is a permissive inference instruction that informs the jury that “‘where evidence which would properly be part of a case is within the control of the party whose interest it would naturally be to produce it, 27 No. 80396-4-I/28 and, . . . he fails to do so, — the jury may draw an inference that it would be unfavorable to him.’” State v. Blair, 117 Wn.2d 479, 485-86 , 816 P.2d 718 (1991) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Davis, 73 Wn.2d 271, 276 , 438 P.2d 185 (1968), overruled on other grounds by State v. Abdulle, 174 Wn.2d 411 , 275 P.3d 1113 (2012)).

2016A permissive inference instruction permits, but does not require, a jury to find a presumed fact from a proven fact. 156 Wn.2d at 822 .

2016Sandoval, 123 Wn.

2009Hanna, 87 F.3d at 1037; Schwendeman, 971 F.2d at 316 ; Randhawa, 133 Wash.2d at 78 , 941 P.2d 661 .

2009A valid permissive inference instruction is one which "allows—but does not require— the trier of fact to infer the elemental fact from proof by the prosecutor of the basic one and which places no burden of any kind on the defendant." County Court of Ulster County v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 157 , 99 S.Ct. 2213 , 60 L.Ed.2d 777 (1979) (citing Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837 , 840 n. 3, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 2361-62 , 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973)).

2009A valid permissive inference instruction is one which "allows—but does not require— the trier of fact to infer the elemental fact from proof by the prosecutor of the basic one and which places no burden of any kind on the defendant." County Court of Ulster County v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 157 , 99 S.Ct. 2213 , 60 L.Ed.2d 777 (1979) (citing Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837 , 840 n. 3, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 2361-62 , 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973)).

1997We indicated, further, that the determination of whether a permissive inference instruction meets that standard must be done on a "case-by-case basis in light of the particular evidence presented to the jury in each case." Hanna, 123 Wash.2d at 712 , 871 P.2d 135 (citing Ulster, 442 U.S. at 162-63, 165 , 99 S.Ct. at 2227-28 , 2228-29 and Schwendeman v. Wallenstein, 971 F.2d 313, 316 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1052 , 113 S.Ct. 975 , 122 L.Ed.2d 130 (1993)).

1997We indicated, further, that the determination of whether a permissive inference instruction meets that standard must be done on a "case-by-case basis in light of the particular evidence presented to the jury in each case." Hanna, 123 Wash.2d at 712 , 871 P.2d 135 (citing Ulster, 442 U.S. at 162-63, 165 , 99 S.Ct. at 2227-28 , 2228-29 and Schwendeman v. Wallenstein, 971 F.2d 313, 316 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1052 , 113 S.Ct. 975 , 122 L.Ed.2d 130 (1993)).