WPIC 39.11 Kidnapping—Second Degree—Elements
11 WAPRAC WPIC 39.11Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 39.11 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Part VI. Crimes Against Personal Security
WPIC CHAPTER 39. Kidnapping, Unlawful Imprisonment and Custodial Interference
WPIC 39.11 Kidnapping—Second Degree—Elements
To convict the defendant of the crime of kidnapping in the second degree, each of the following elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That on or about (date) , the defendant intentionally abducted (name of person) ; and
(2) That this act occurred in the State of Washington.
If you find from the evidence that each of these elements has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of guilty.
On the other hand, if after weighing all the evidence you have a reasonable doubt as to any one of these elements, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
NOTE ON USE
Along with this instruction, use WPIC 39.30 (Abduct—Definition) and WPIC 10.01 (Intent—Intentionally—Definition).
If the statutory defense is in issue, use WPIC 19.02 (Kidnapping—Second Degree—Defense) with this instruction.
For a discussion of the phrase “this act” in the jurisdictional element, see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use to WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
COMMENT
RCW 9A.40.030.
Definitions. The statutory definition of “abduct” includes “restraint” by “secreting or holding” a person without that person's consent. RCW 9A.40.010(1). In State v. Saunders, 177 Wn.App. 259, 311 P.3d 601 (2013), the court approved this instruction, finding it unnecessary to include in the elements the definitions of “abduct” and “restraint.” Using a separate instruction that defines “abduct” is sufficient. See WPIC 39.30 (Abduct—Definition).
Restraint of an incompetent person without consent of that person's legal guardian is kidnapping. The term “incompetent person” requires proof that a formal guardianship (or some other similar legal protection) has been established and is not satisfied merely by proof that the person restrained is under some mental disability. State v. Simms, 95 Wn.App. 910, 977 P.2d 647 (1999).
The court in State v. Stubsjoen, 48 Wn.App. 139, 738 P.2d 306 (1987), held that for purposes of RCW 9A.40.030, a person is abducted when held in areas either public or private under circumstances where it is unlikely that those persons directly affected by the victim's disappearance will find the victim. There must be some evidence that the defendant in fact limited the victim's liberty. State v. Dillon, 163 Wn.App. 101, 257 P.3d 678 (2011) (13-year-old consented to go to apartment with man he met on the internet; insufficient to show abduction).
Lesser included offense. Unlawful imprisonment is a lesser included offense of kidnapping. State v. Russell, 104 Wn.App. 422, 449 n.61, 16 P.3d 664 (2001); State v. Davis, 177 Wn.App. 454, 461, 311 P.3d 1278 (2013).
[Current as of January 2019.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |