Home Table of Contents

WPIC 3.01 Multiple Counts—Single Defendant

11 WAPRAC WPIC 3.01Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal

11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 3.01 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part I. General Instructions
WPIC CHAPTER 3. Multiple Charges/Joint Defendants
WPIC 3.01 Multiple Counts—Single Defendant
A separate crime is charged in each count. You must decide each count separately. Your verdict on one count should not control your verdict on [any] [the] other count.
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction when there are multiple counts and a single defendant. Use bracketed material as applicable.
COMMENT
In State v. Bradford, 60 Wn.App. 857, 808 P.2d 174 (1991), the jury inquired of the trial judge whether jurors could consider knowledge gained from one count when deliberating on another count. The trial judge answered that the jury was free to determine the use to which it will put evidence presented during trial. The Bradford court held that this response did not contradict WPIC 3.01, but suggested that additional language be added to WPIC 3.01 that informs the jury, in the absence of a limiting instruction, that “all evidence is applicable on all counts, provided that it meets relevance requirements.” State v. Bradford, 60 Wn.App. at 862. The language suggested in Bradford may be appropriate in individual cases. However, the WPI Committee has not included this language in the instruction, because the jury will have been instructed as to the use of the evidence in most cases and the suggested language may be more confusing than helpful to jurors. If the language suggested in Bradford is added to this instruction, the WPI Committee believes that further qualifications are necessary and recommends that the instruction be tailored to the specific evidence in the case. If this recommendation is followed, the trial court must take caution to avoid commenting on the evidence.
In State v. Standifer, 48 Wn.App. 121, 737 P.2d 1308 (1987), the court held that, under the circumstances of the case, giving WPIC 3.01 was sufficient to guard against possible prejudice to the defendant from the failure of the defendant's attorney to renew a motion to sever offenses.
Occasionally, the prosecuting attorney files an information with alternative counts. For these cases, the jurors will need to be instructed about their procedures for deliberating on the alternative counts. For assistance in drafting these instructions, see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and subsequent instructions on the related practice of filing charges containing alternative elements.
[Current as of May 2019.]
End of Document