WPIC 39.40 Luring—Definition
11 WAPRAC WPIC 39.40Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11 Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 39.40 (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 39.40 Luring—Definition
A person commits the crime of luring when he or she orders, lures, or attempts to lure a person [under the age of 16] [or] [with a developmental disability]
[into an area or structure that is obscured from or inaccessible to the public] [or]
[away from any area or structure constituting a [bus terminal] [airport terminal] [transportation terminal]] [or]
[into a motor vehicle].
The perpetrator must act with the intent to [harm the other person's health, safety, or welfare] [or] [facilitate the commission of a crime]. The perpetrator must also be unknown to the other person and must not have the consent of the other person's [parent or] guardian.
NOTE ON USE
Use WPIC 10.01 (Intent-Intentionally-Definition) with this instruction.
Use “parent or guardian” if the offense involves a minor. If the offense involves an adult with a developmental disability, use only “guardian.”
If the offense involves a developmentally disabled person, use WPIC 45.10 (Developmentally Disabled—Developmental Disability—Definitions) with this instruction.
The bracketed alternatives related to various transportation terminals apply only to crimes committed on or after January 1, 2013. See the discussion in the Comment to WPIC 39.41 (Luring—Elements).
COMMENT
The Legislature amended the luring statute, effective for crimes occurring on or after June 9, 2016, to include an intent element. Prior to this amendment, the statute omitted the intent element, and there was a split of authority in the Court of Appeals regarding whether an implied intent element was needed to prevent the statute from being facially overbroad. See State v. Homan, 191 Wn.App. 759, 777, 364 P.3d 839 (2015); State v. Dana, 84 Wn.App. 166, 926 P.2d 344 (1996). Because this instruction includes the intent element, it should be sufficient whether the alleged crime occurred before or after the statutory amendment.
RCW 9A.40.090. See the Comment to WPIC 39.41 (Luring—Elements).
For a discussion of the bracketed alternatives, see the Comment to WPIC 39.41 (Luring—Elements).
[Current as of January 2019.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |