WPIC 38.15 Abandonment of a Dependent Person—Third Degree—Elements
11 WAPRAC WPIC 38.15Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 38.15 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Part VI. Crimes Against Personal Security
WPIC CHAPTER 38. Criminal Mistreatment
WPIC 38.15 Abandonment of a Dependent Person—Third Degree—Elements
To convict the defendant of the crime of abandonment of a dependent person in the third degree, each of the following five elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That on or about (date), the defendant recklessly abandoned (name of person);
(2) [(a)] [That as a result of being abandoned, (name of person) suffered bodily harm;] [or]
[(b)] [That abandoning (name of person) created an imminent and substantial risk that (name of person) would suffer substantial bodily harm;]
(3) That (name of person) was a [child] [dependent person];
(4) That the defendant [was the parent of (name of person)] [was entrusted with the physical custody of (name of person)] [had assumed the responsibility to provide to (name of person) the basic necessities of life] [was employed to provide to (name of person) the basic necessities]; and
(5) That any of these acts occurred in the [State of Washington] [City of ] [County of ].
If you find from the evidence that elements (1), (3), (4), (5) and alternative element (2)(a) or alternative element (2)(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 (2)(a) or (2)(b) has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, as long as each juror finds that either (2)(a) or (2)(b) 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 elements (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5), then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
NOTE ON USE
The instruction is drafted for cases in which the jury needs to be instructed using two or more of the alternatives for element (2). 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 (2), revise the instruction to remove references to alternative elements, following the format set forth in WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form). Use bracketed material as applicable.
For a discussion of the phrase “any of these acts” in the jurisdictional element, see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use to WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
With this instruction, use as applicable WPIC 2.03.01 (Substantial Bodily Harm—Definition), WPIC 2.03 (Bodily Injury—Physical Injury—Bodily Harm—Definition), WPIC 10.03 (Recklessness—Definition), WPIC 38.20 (Basic Necessities of Life—Definition), WPIC 38.21 (Child—Definition), WPIC 38.22 (Dependent Person—Definition), WPIC 38.23 (Employed—Definition), and WPIC 38.24 (Abandons—Definition).
In element (5), choose from among the bracketed phrases depending on whether the case is in superior, municipal, or district court. See WPIC 4.20 (Introduction).
COMMENT
RCW 9A.42.080.
Substantial bodily harm. Unlike the definition of “great bodily harm,” which is defined differently in two separate statutes, see the Comment to WPIC 38.11 (Abandonment of a Dependent Person—First Degree—Elements), there is only a single statutory definition of “substantial bodily harm,” which appears in two separate statutes, RCW 9A.04.110 and RCW 9A.42.010. Accordingly, practitioners should use WPIC 2.03.01 (Substantial Bodily Harm—Definition) to define “substantial bodily harm,” even for cases involving abandonment of a dependent person. Similarly, practitioners in abandonment cases should use WPIC 2.03 (Bodily Injury—Physical Injury—Bodily Harm—Definition) to define “bodily harm.”
[Current as of January 2019.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |