Home Table of Contents

WPIC 300.08 Aggravating Circumstance—Accomplice Liability

11A WAPRAC WPIC 300.08Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal

11A Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 300.08 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part XVI. Exceptional Sentences—Aggravating Circumstances
WPIC CHAPTER 300. Exceptional Sentences—Aggravating Circumstances
WPIC 300.08 Aggravating Circumstance—Accomplice Liability
An aggravating circumstance may be proved in two ways. The State may prove that the defendant's own conduct satisfies the requirements for that aggravating circumstance. Alternatively, the State may prove that (1) the acts were committed by another person, (2) the defendant was an accomplice of that person, and (3) the defendant knew that the acts of another person met the requirements for the aggravating circumstance.
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction as necessary if there is evidence that the crime was committed with the participation of an accomplice. In a stand-alone sentencing proceeding, also use WPIC 10.51 (Accomplice—Definition).
COMMENT
If the defendant was convicted as an accomplice, an exceptional sentence may still be available. There is no requirement that the statute defining the aggravating circumstance specifically refer to accomplice liability. If the defendant personally committed the acts giving rise to the aggravating circumstance, that circumstance may form the basis for an exceptional sentence. State v. Allen, 182 Wn.2d 364, 341 P.3d 268 (2015).
If the defendant did not personally commit the acts, an exceptional sentence may be imposed only if the defendant knew the facts giving rise to the aggravating circumstance. For example, suppose that an accomplice of the defendant commits an economic offense that involves multiple victims. This would constitute a major economic offense. The defendant, however, would be subject to an exceptional sentence only if he knew that the offense involved multiple victims. State v. Hayes, 182 Wn.2d 556, 342 P.3d 1144 (2015). The dissent in Hayes cautions that, in cases involving multiple counts, there may need to be separate instructions regarding the defendant's level of knowledge of the aggravating circumstances as to each substantive count.
[Current as of April 2019.]
End of Document