Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Washington opinions name it 1 courts 2009–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Craneyellow2 sentences2020The State’s attorney presented the jury what he called “options.” Washington courts recognize that a Petrich unanimity instruction is not required when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” State v. Crane, 116 Wn.2d 315, 326 (1991); State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989). 2012Coleman, 159 Wn.2d at 511-12 ; Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d at 409 . ¶35 A Petrich unanimity instruction is not required, however, when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” Crane, 116 Wn.2d at 326 ; State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989); State v. Love, 80 Wn. | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Handran
red
2 sentences2020The State’s attorney presented the jury what he called “options.” Washington courts recognize that a Petrich unanimity instruction is not required when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” State v. Crane, 116 Wn.2d 315, 326 (1991); State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989). 2020The State’s attorney presented the jury what he called “options.” Washington courts recognize that a Petrich unanimity instruction is not required when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” State v. Crane, 116 Wn.2d 315, 326 (1991); State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989). | 5 | 2012–2020 |
State v. Corbett
green
2 sentences2025In State v. Corbett, 158 Wn. App. 576, 592 , 242 P.3d 52 (2010), we held that where the defendant proposed jury instructions that did not include a Petrich instruction, the invited error doctrine precluded him from challenging on appeal for the first time the trial court’s failure to provide a Petrich unanimity instruction. 2025In State v. Corbett, 158 Wn. App. 576, 592 , 242 P.3d 52 (2010), we held that where the defendant proposed jury instructions that did not include a Petrich instruction, the invited error doctrine precluded him from challenging on appeal for the first time the trial court’s failure to provide a Petrich unanimity instruction. | 3 | 2014–2025 |
State v. Kitchen
yellow
2 sentences2014In a Statement of Additional Grounds for Review SAG), Carson further asserts that ( 1) inconsistent testimony during the child hearsay hearing 1 State v. Petrich, 101 Wn.2d 566, 572 , 683 P. 2d 173 ( 1984), overruled on other grounds by State v. Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d 403 , 405 -06, 756 P. 2d 105 ( 1988). 2 State v. Bone -Club, 128 Wn.2d 254 , 906 P. 2d 325 ( 1995). 2012Coleman, 159 Wn.2d at 511-12 ; Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d at 409 . ¶35 A Petrich unanimity instruction is not required, however, when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” Crane, 116 Wn.2d at 326 ; State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989); State v. Love, 80 Wn. | 2 | 2012–2014 |
State v. Boyd
green
2 sentences2019App. 910, 922 , 155 P.3d 188 (2007). 2 No. 78961-9-1/3 defendant is charged with only one count of criminal conduct.”6 The instruction preserves the constitutional right to a unanimous jury verdict by telling the jury that the State must prove a particular criminal act beyond a reasonable doubt and that all jurors must unanimously agree on which act it proved.7 The instruction is unnecessary where the State “‘elect[s] the act upon which it will rely for conviction.”8 An effective election must “‘clearly identif[y] the act upon which the charge in question is based”9 and “disclaim its intention 2019ANALYSIS Hall argues the court failed to give a Petrich unanimity instruction, a manifest constitutional error he may raise for the first time on appeal.4 We review the adequacy of jury instructions de novo.5 A Petrich instruction is appropriate when the evidence in a criminal case “‘indicates that several distinct criminal acts have been committed, but [the] ~ RP (July 31, 2018) at 236, 238. ~ RAP 2.5(a). ~ State v. Boyd, 137 Wn. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Petrich
red
2 sentences2014In a Statement of Additional Grounds for Review SAG), Carson further asserts that ( 1) inconsistent testimony during the child hearsay hearing 1 State v. Petrich, 101 Wn.2d 566, 572 , 683 P. 2d 173 ( 1984), overruled on other grounds by State v. Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d 403 , 405 -06, 756 P. 2d 105 ( 1988). 2 State v. Bone -Club, 128 Wn.2d 254 , 906 P. 2d 325 ( 1995). 2014In a Statement of Additional Grounds for Review SAG), Carson further asserts that ( 1) inconsistent testimony during the child hearsay hearing 1 State v. Petrich, 101 Wn.2d 566, 572 , 683 P. 2d 173 ( 1984), overruled on other grounds by State v. Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d 403 , 405 -06, 756 P. 2d 105 ( 1988). 2 State v. Bone -Club, 128 Wn.2d 254 , 906 P. 2d 325 ( 1995). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Bone-Club
green
2 sentences2014In a Statement of Additional Grounds for Review SAG), Carson further asserts that ( 1) inconsistent testimony during the child hearsay hearing 1 State v. Petrich, 101 Wn.2d 566, 572 , 683 P. 2d 173 ( 1984), overruled on other grounds by State v. Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d 403 , 405 -06, 756 P. 2d 105 ( 1988). 2 State v. Bone -Club, 128 Wn.2d 254 , 906 P. 2d 325 ( 1995). 2014In a Statement of Additional Grounds for Review SAG), Carson further asserts that ( 1) inconsistent testimony during the child hearsay hearing 1 State v. Petrich, 101 Wn.2d 566, 572 , 683 P. 2d 173 ( 1984), overruled on other grounds by State v. Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d 403 , 405 -06, 756 P. 2d 105 ( 1988). 2 State v. Bone -Club, 128 Wn.2d 254 , 906 P. 2d 325 ( 1995). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Ellis
green
1 sentence2013State v. Ellis, 71 Wn. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Coleman
green
1 sentence2012Coleman, 159 Wn.2d at 511-12 ; Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d at 409 . ¶35 A Petrich unanimity instruction is not required, however, when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” Crane, 116 Wn.2d at 326 ; State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989); State v. Love, 80 Wn. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
State v. Love
green
2 sentences2012App. 357, 361 , 908 P.2d 395 (1996). 2012Coleman, 159 Wn.2d at 511-12 ; Kitchen, 110 Wn.2d at 409 . ¶35 A Petrich unanimity instruction is not required, however, when the State presents evidence of multiple acts that indicate a “continuing course of conduct.” Crane, 116 Wn.2d at 326 ; State v. Handran, 113 Wn.2d 11, 17 , 775 P.2d 453 (1989); State v. Love, 80 Wn. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.