Background

• Glasmann was convicted of first degree kidnapping and obstruction, and lesser offenses of second degree assault and attempted second degree robbery, based on incidents at a Lakewood motel and minimart while he was intoxicated.
• The State used an extensive PowerPoint closing that displayed his booking photo with captions and altered images, including “GUILTY” overlays, and argued credibility and guilt.
• Glasmann’s booking photo and other exhibits were not admitted as evidence in the form shown, but the slides were presented during closing.
• Defense argued for lesser included offenses and challenged the charged degrees; the State sought to prove intent for all charged offenses.
• The trial court did not sustain any objections to the closing slides, and the defendant did not object at trial, but later sought relief via direct appeal and personal restraint petition.
• The Washington Supreme Court held that the prosecutor’s conduct was flagrant and prejudicial, meriting reversal and a new trial.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• State v. Pete, 152 Wn.2d 546 (2004) (unauthorized evidence prejudicial to verdict when presented to jury)
• State v. Rinkes, 70 Wn.2d 854 (1967) (newspaper/tabloid material to jury prejudicial and improper)
• State v. Belgarde, 110 Wn.2d 504 (1988) (prosecutorial misconduct requires reversal under prejudice standard)
• State v. Charlton, 90 Wn.2d 657 (1978) (prejudicial prosecutorial tactics require reversal; focus on misconduct over evidence)
• State v. Fleming, 83 Wn. App. 209 (1996) (misstating burden of proof constitutes improper argument; varies by context)