Personal Restraint Petition Of: Larry Jay French, 55363-5

Background

Petitioner Larry Jay French was convicted in 2018 of first‑degree child molestation and filed a personal restraint petition (timely) challenging that conviction.
French alleged extensive ineffective assistance of trial counsel: failure to investigate, interview witnesses, consult with or prepare the client, file pretrial motions, object to evidence, cross‑examine effectively, impeach witnesses, allow testimony, and (allegedly) conceding guilt, among other failures.
He also alleged ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for not raising many of those trial‑counsel errors and for issues regarding DNA evidence and prosecutor conduct.
Additional claims included insufficiency of the evidence, a defective aggravating‑factor jury instruction (failure to define “sexual abuse” and unanimity), prosecutorial misconduct during closing, error in the court’s answer to a jury question, and lack of service of the information.
The Court of Appeals denied relief, finding French failed to show deficient performance or prejudice for either trial or appellate counsel claims, that the evidence was sufficient, that instruction and prosecutor‑misconduct claims lacked the necessary showing, and that service was adequate.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel	Counsel failed to investigate, interview witnesses, prepare, object, cross‑examine, impeach, or otherwise provide competent representation	Counsel's performance was reasonable; French does not identify what admissible evidence or motions would have changed the outcome	Denied — French failed to show deficient performance or resulting prejudice
Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel	Appellate counsel omitted meritorious trial‑error claims (hearsay, DNA issues, conceding guilt, prosecutor misconduct, insufficiency)	Omitted issues would not have been meritorious; no prejudice from not raising them	Denied — no showing that omitted claims were meritorious
Sufficiency of the evidence	Trial testimony (including victim) was unreliable; conviction not supported beyond a reasonable doubt	Testimony was sufficient for a rational juror to convict	Denied — evidence sufficient to support conviction
Aggravating‑factor instruction/unanimity	Jury instruction failed to define “sexual abuse” and did not require unanimity on the specific acts	No legal requirement to define “sexual abuse” or to instruct unanimity as argued	Denied — instruction was not deficient
Prosecutorial misconduct / court answer to jury question	Prosecutor argued improperly during closing; court’s answer to jury question commented on evidence	No contemporaneous objection; any improper argument was not so flagrant that an instruction could not cure it; court properly told jurors to consider trial evidence	Denied — misconduct not shown to be incurable; court’s answer proper
Due process / service of the information	French was not served with the charging information, violating due process	Record does not show a service failure	Denied — no demonstration of defective service

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established deficient performance and prejudice standard for ineffective assistance)
State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322 (applying Strickland standard in Washington)
State v. Grier, 171 Wn.2d 17 (strong presumption that counsel's performance is reasonable)
In re Pers. Restraint of Coats, 173 Wn.2d 123 (high standard for collateral relief)
In re Pers. Restraint of Sandoval, 189 Wn.2d 811 (burden on petitioner to show actual and substantial prejudice for constitutional error)
In re Pers. Restraint of Finstad, 177 Wn.2d 501 (nonconstitutional error must be a fundamental defect causing miscarriage of justice)
In re Pers. Restraint of Domingo‑Cornelio, 196 Wn.2d 255 (standards for collateral relief)
In re Pers. Restraint of Lord, 123 Wn.2d 296 (limits on relitigating issues previously decided on direct appeal)
State v. Emery, 174 Wn.2d 741 (prosecutorial‑misconduct harmless‑error and cure‑by‑instruction principles)