WPIC 76.06 Extortion—Second Degree—Elements
11A WAPRAC WPIC 76.06Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11A Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 76.06 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Part IX. Crimes Against Property
WPIC CHAPTER 76. Extortion
WPIC 76.06 Extortion—Second Degree—Elements
To convict the defendant of the crime of extortion in the second degree, each of the following three elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That on or about (date), the defendant knowingly obtained or attempted to obtain property or services of another [including sexual favors] by a wrongful threat;
(2) That such threat communicated, directly or indirectly, an intent
[(a)] [to accuse any person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against any person] [or]
[(b)] [to expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt or ridicule] [or]
[(c)] [to reveal any information sought to be concealed by the person threatened] [or]
[(d)] [to testify or provide information or withhold testimony or information with respect to another's legal claim or defense] [or]
[(e)] [to take wrongful action as an official against anyone or anything, or wrongfully withhold official action, or cause such action or withholding] [or]
[(f)] [to bring about or continue a strike, boycott, or other similar collective action to obtain property that is not demanded or received for the benefit of the group that the defendant purports to represent] [or]
[(g)] [to do any act that is intended to harm substantially the person threatened or another with respect to his health, safety, business, financial condition, or personal relationships];
and
(3) That any of these acts occurred in the State of Washington.
If you find from the evidence that elements (1) and (3) and any of the alternative elements [(2)(a),] [(2)(b),] [(2)(c),] [(2)(d),] [(2)(e),] [(2)(f),] or [(2)(g)] 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),] [(2)(b),] [(2)(c),] [(2)(d),] [(2)(e),] [(2)(f),] or [(2)(g)] has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, as long as each juror finds that at least one alternative has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
On the other hand, if after weighing all of the evidence you have a reasonable doubt as to any one of elements (1), (2), or (3), then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
NOTE ON USE
With this instruction use WPIC 10.01 (Intent—Intentionally—Definition) and WPIC 10.02 (Knowledge—Knowingly—Definition). Also use as applicable WPIC 2.02 (Benefit—Definition), WPIC 2.21 (Property—Definition), and WPIC 79.06 (Services—Definition).
If the bracketed phrase “to accuse any person of a crime [etc.]” is used and if the statutory defense is in issue, use WPIC 19.09 (Extortion—Second Degree—Defense) with this instruction.
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 the related special verdict form, see WPIC 190.09 (Special Verdict Form—Elements with Alternatives). 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).
For a discussion of the phrase “any of these acts” in element (3), see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use to WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
COMMENT
RCW 9A.56.130; RCW 9A.56.110; RCW 9A.04.110(28)(d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j).
Wrongful threats. “[O]nly those threats that bear no relation to a plausible claim of right to the property or services for which the threat was made will be considered extortionate. Such threats are inherently wrongful and are not protected speech.” State v. Pauling, 149 Wn.2d 381, 393, 69 P.3d 331 (2003).
Defense. If the threat was to communicate an intent to accuse a person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against a person, RCW 9A.56.130(2) creates a defense if the defendant reasonably believed the threatened criminal charge to be true and the defendant's sole purpose was to compel or induce the person threatened to take reasonable action to make good the wrong that was the subject of such threatened criminal charge. See the Comment to WPIC 19.09 (Extortion—Second Degree—Defense) for a discussion of burden of proof issues raised by this defense.
Alternative means. Second degree extortion by threat is a single offense and the provisions of RCW 9A.04.110(28)(d) through (j) are ways by which the offense may be committed. Therefore, they may be charged in the alternative, as is done in the pattern instruction's element (2). A jury need only be unanimous as to the guilt of the defendant and not as to the manner in which the offense was committed so long as there is evidence to support each of the means charged. State v. Garvin, 28 Wn.App. 82, 621 P.2d 215 (1980). See WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Comment to WPIC 4.23 (Elements of the Crime—Alternative Elements—Alternative Means for Committing a Single Offense—Form).
[Current as of December 2018.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |