jury treats instruction in Washington

2026The incident occurred with Blackburn’s bedroom door closed and C.B. recalled, “My grandmother was in her bedroom, and my grandfather was in his office.” Our Supreme Court has held that “[t]he ‘to convict’ instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence.” State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005).

2019A to-convict instruction “carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence.” State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005).

2026The incident occurred with Blackburn’s bedroom door closed and C.B. recalled, “My grandmother was in her bedroom, and my grandfather was in his office.” Our Supreme Court has held that “[t]he ‘to convict’ instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence.” State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005).

2019A to-convict instruction “carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence.” State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005).

2013App. 324, 330 , 253 P.3d 476 (2011) (citing State v. O’Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91, 100-01 , 217 P.3d 756 (2009)); State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005) (observing that the elements instruction “carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence”). 116 With respect to the claimed omissions from the trial court’s introduction to its concluding instructions, though, we disagree.

2013App. 324, 330 , 253 P.3d 476 (2011) (citing State v. O'Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91, 100-01 , 217 P.3d 756 (2009»; State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1,6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005) (observing that the elements instruction "carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a 'yardstick' by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence").

2013App. 324, 330 , 253 P.3d 476 (2011) (citing State v. O’Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91, 100-01 , 217 P.3d 756 (2009)); State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005) (observing that the elements instruction “carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence”). 116 With respect to the claimed omissions from the trial court’s introduction to its concluding instructions, though, we disagree.

2013App. 324, 330 , 253 P.3d 476 (2011) (citing State v. O'Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91, 100-01 , 217 P.3d 756 (2009»; State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1,6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005) (observing that the elements instruction "carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a 'yardstick' by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence").

2013App. 324, 330 , 253 P.3d 476 (2011) (citing State v. O’Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91, 100-01 , 217 P.3d 756 (2009)); State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1, 6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005) (observing that the elements instruction “carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a ‘yardstick’ by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence”). 116 With respect to the claimed omissions from the trial court’s introduction to its concluding instructions, though, we disagree.

2013App. 324, 330 , 253 P.3d 476 (2011) (citing State v. O'Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91, 100-01 , 217 P.3d 756 (2009»; State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1,6 , 109 P.3d 415 (2005) (observing that the elements instruction "carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a 'yardstick' by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence").

2005Errors are “manifest” for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have “ ‘practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.’ ” Roberts, 142 Wn.2d at 500 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wn.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶10 The “to convict” instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a “yardstick” by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence.

2005Errors are "manifest" for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have "`practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.'" Roberts, 142 Wash.2d at 500 , 14 P.3d 713 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wash.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶ 10 The "to convict" instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a "yardstick" by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence.

2005Errors are “manifest” for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have “ ‘practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.’ ” Roberts, 142 Wn.2d at 500 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wn.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶10 The “to convict” instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a “yardstick” by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence.

2005Errors are "manifest" for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have "`practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.'" Roberts, 142 Wash.2d at 500 , 14 P.3d 713 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wash.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶ 10 The "to convict" instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a "yardstick" by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence.

2005Errors are “manifest” for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have “ ‘practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.’ ” Roberts, 142 Wn.2d at 500 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wn.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶10 The “to convict” instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a “yardstick” by which to measure a defendant’s guilt or innocence.

2005Errors are "manifest" for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have "`practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.'" Roberts, 142 Wash.2d at 500 , 14 P.3d 713 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wash.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶ 10 The "to convict" instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a "yardstick" by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence.

2026Further, the law of the case doctrine’s requirement that the State prove every element in a jury instruction to which it does not voice opposition “benefits the system by encouraging trial counsel to review all jury instructions to ensure their propriety 41 86238-3-I/42 before the instructions are given to the jury.” Hickman, 135 Wn.2d at 105 ; see CrR 6.15(c).

2005Errors are "manifest" for purposes of RAP 2.5(a)(3) when they have "`practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.'" Roberts, 142 Wash.2d at 500 , 14 P.3d 713 (quoting State v. WWJ Corp., 138 Wash.2d 595, 603 , 980 P.2d 1257 (1999)). ¶ 10 The "to convict" instruction carries with it a special weight because the jury treats the instruction as a "yardstick" by which to measure a defendant's guilt or innocence.