Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

69 Wash. App. 222

State v. Staley

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided March 30, 1993

Court of Appeals of Washington · decided 1993-03-30

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1994

1 state decisions

Applies WA 2 § 2.06.150

Relies on In re Disbarment of Kleindienst · 96 Wash. 2d 373 - State v. Cleppe · 54 Wash. App. 314 - State v. Knapp

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1993-03-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Brown, J.*

¶1(dissenting) — The law requires the State to prove the defendant possessed the unlawful controlled substance. The defendant must show that the substance was possessed "unwittingly", that is, without the defendant's knowledge. State v. Cleppe, 96 Wn.2d 373, 635 P.2d 435 (1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 1006 (1982); State v. Knapp, 54 *227Wn. App. 314, 773 P.2d 134, review denied, 113 Wn.2d 1022 (1989).

¶2The trial court instructed the jury on unwitting possession as follows:

Possession of a controlled substance is not unlawful if the defendant did not know that it was in his possession.

¶3Instruction 6 allows the defendant to argue he did not know the substance in the vial was a controlled substance and thus could not know it was in his possession.

¶4I would affirm the conviction.

¶5Review granted at 122 Wn.2d 1001 (1993).

¶6Judge Carolyn A. Brown is serving as a judge pro tempore of the Court of Appeals pursuant to RCW 2.06.150.

/69/washapp/222 · .json · Public domain