WPIC 36.21.06 Stalking—Felony—Victim with Official Capacity in Legal System—Elements
11 WAPRAC WPIC 36.21.06Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 36.21.06 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Part VI. Crimes Against Personal Security
WPIC CHAPTER 36. Harassment, Hate Crimes, and Domestic Violence
WPIC 36.21.06 Stalking—Felony—Victim with Official Capacity in Legal System—Elements
To convict the defendant of the crime of [felony] stalking, each of the following eight elements must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That on or about (date), the defendant [intentionally and repeatedly harassed] [or] [repeatedly followed (name of person);
(2) That (name of person) was placed in fear that the defendant intended to injure [him] [her] [or] [another person] [or] [the property of [(name of person)] [or] [another person]];
(3) That the feeling of fear was one that a reasonable person in the same situation would experience under all the circumstances;
(4) That the defendant
[(a)] [intended to frighten, intimidate, or harass (name of person);] [or]
[(b)] [knew or reasonably should have known that (name of person) was afraid, intimidated, or harassed even if the defendant did not intend to place [him] [her] in fear or to intimidate or harass [him] [her];]
(5) That the defendant acted without lawful authority;
(6) That the defendant knew that (name of person) was a current or former [law enforcement officer] [judge] [juror] [attorney] [victim advocate] [legislator] [community corrections officer] [employee, contract staff person, or volunteer of a correctional agency] [court employee] [court clerk] [courthouse facilitator] [employee of the [child protective] [child welfare] or [adult protective] services division within the Department of Social and Health Services];
(7) That the defendant stalked (name of person) [to retaliate for an act that (name of person) performed during the course of [his] [her] official duties] [or] [to influence (name of person's) performance of [his] [her] official duties]; and
(8) That any of the defendant's acts occurred in the State of Washington.
If you find from the evidence that elements (1), (2), (3), (5), (6), (7), and (8), and either of the alternative elements (4)(a) or (4)(b), have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of guilty. To return a verdict of guilty, the jury need not be unanimous as to which of alternatives (4)(a) or (4)(b) has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, as long as each juror finds that at least one alternative has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
On the other hand, if, after weighing all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt as to any one of the eight elements, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction if the defendant is charged with stalking as a felony based on the victim having official duties within the legal system. If the defendant is charged with a felony based on one of the other statutory enhancing factors, then use one of the other felony to-convict instructions in this series between WPIC 36.21.02 through WPIC 36.21.07 instead of using this instruction. If multiple enhancing factors are charged, then see the Comment to WPIC 36.21.02 (Stalking—Felony—Previous Harassment Conviction—Elements).
Use the bracketed word “felony” only if the jury is also being instructed on the gross misdemeanor form of stalking. See discussion in the Comment to WPIC 36.21.02 (Stalking—Felony—Previous Harassment Conviction—Elements). Use additional bracketed material as applicable.
With this instruction, use WPIC 36.23 (Stalking—Harass—Definition), WPIC 10.01 (Intent—Intentionally—Definition), and WPIC 10.02 (Knowledge—Knowingly—Definition). Also use, as applicable, WPIC 36.22 (Stalking—Follows—Definition), WPIC 36.24 (Stalking—Repeatedly—Definition), and WPIC 36.27.02 (Stalking—Correctional Agency—Definition). See also WPIC 36.27 (Stalking—Without Lawful Authority—Definition) and WPIC 36.25 (Stalking—Intent to Intimidate or Harass—Inference). If the reasonableness of the victim's fear is an issue, use WPIC 36.27.03 (Stalking—Reasonable Fear—Definition).
This instruction is drafted for cases in which the jury needs to be instructed using both of the alternatives for element (4). Care must be taken to limit the alternatives to those that were included in the charging document and are supported by sufficient evidence. For directions on when and how to draft instructions with alternative elements, see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use and Comment to WPIC 4.23 (Elements of the Crime—Alternative Elements—Alternative Means for Committing a Single Offense—Form). For any case in which substantial evidence supports only one of the alternatives in element (4), revise the instruction to remove references to alternative elements, following the format set forth in WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
For a discussion of the phrase “any of the defendant's acts” in element (8), see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use to WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
COMMENT
RCW 9A.46.110(1), (5). The 2013 statutory amendment expanded felony stalking to include a court employee, court clerk, or courthouse facilitator.
For discussions of related issues, see the Comments to WPIC 36.21.02 (Stalking—Felony—Previous Harassment Conviction—Elements) and 36.21 (Stalking—Gross Misdemeanor—Elements).
[Current as of April 2020.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |