WPIC 36.06 Harassment—Gross Misdemeanor—Definition
11 WAPRAC WPIC 36.06Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 36.06 (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 36.06 Harassment—Gross Misdemeanor—Definition
A person commits the crime of harassment when he or she, without lawful authority, knowingly threatens
[to cause bodily injury immediately or in the future to another person] [or]
[to cause physical damage to another person's property] [or]
[to subject another person to physical confinement or restraint] [or]
[maliciously to do any act which is intended to substantially harm another person with respect to his or her physical health or safety]
and when he or she by words or conduct places the person threatened in reasonable fear that the threat will be carried out.
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction if it will help the jury understand the charged offense or if it is necessary to define this particular offense for the jury. See the Comment to WPIC 4.24 (Definition of the Crime—Form).
Use this instruction when the crime charged is non-felony harassment under RCW 9A.46.020 or when non-felony harassment is presented to the jury as a lesser included offense. See discussion in the Comment to WPIC 36.07 (Harassment—Gross Misdemeanor—Elements).
With this instruction, use WPIC 2.24 (Threat—Definition), and WPIC 10.02 (Knowledge—Knowingly—Definition). Also use, as applicable, WPIC 2.03 (Bodily Injury—Physical Injury—Bodily Harm—Definition) and WPIC 2.13 (Malice—Maliciously—Definition).
If an instruction defining the phrase “without lawful authority” would be helpful to jurors, then see the Note on Use and Comment for WPIC 36.27 (Stalking—Without Lawful Authority—Definition).
Use bracketed material as applicable.
COMMENT
RCW 9A.46.020.
See Comment to WPIC 36.37 (Harassment—Elements).
In State v. Williams, 144 Wn.2d 197, 26 P.3d 890 (2001), the Washington Supreme Court struck down the portion of the harassment statute that attempted to make it a crime to threaten a person's mental health as being both overbroad and vague. In response to the holding in Williams, the instruction was modified to remove the phrase “mental health” from the fourth bracketed alternative.
[Current as of April 2020.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |