State Of Washington v. Andrew P. Toombs, 76018-1

On May 27, 2014, Andrew Toombs (on an electronic home monitoring program) went to the Fife Police Department upset about equipment issues and encountered employees Filivaa Mageo and Steven Van Zanten.
Toombs clenched his fists, assumed a fighting stance, yelled threats and profanities, but did not raise his fists at or strike either man; several officers then surrounded him.
Officers attempted to arrest him; officers reported being bitten, kneed him, and deployed a taser multiple times before handcuffing him.
Toombs was found incompetent to stand trial and committed for competency restoration, but waited 75 days for admission to Western State Hospital before being restored and tried.
Jury convicted Toombs of two counts of third-degree assault (as to Van Zanten and Mageo), one count of intimidating a public servant (as to Van Zanten), one count of felony harassment, and resisting arrest.
On appeal the court reversed the assault and intimidating-a-public-servant convictions for insufficiency of evidence, accepted the State’s concession that the felony harassment verdict violated unanimity and reversed that conviction, affirmed resisting arrest, and declined to dismiss convictions based on the competency-restoration delay.

Issue	Toombs' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for third-degree assault (Van Zanten, Mageo)	Mere fighting stance, clenched fists, yelling insufficient to prove assault or reasonable apprehension	Stance and proximity created apprehension and apparent ability to inflict harm	Reversed — evidence legally insufficient to support assault convictions
Sufficiency of evidence for intimidating a public servant (Van Zanten)	Request/demand to get Mageo was not an attempt to influence official action; Van Zanten was off-duty and act was not official	Van Zanten’s front-desk duties included handling visitors so the demand implicated official action	Reversed — evidence insufficient to show attempt to influence official action
Unanimity on felony harassment charge	Multiple acts were presented without State election or unanimity instruction, violating unanimity	Conceded jury unanimity error by the State	Reversed — unanimity error; conviction vacated
Remedy for 75-day delay in competency-restoration transfer	Delay violated substantive due process; charges should be dismissed	Dismissal is not an appropriate remedy for alleged substantive due process violation	Not dismissed — court declined to vacate remaining convictions based on delay

State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192 (standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Byrd, 125 Wn.2d 707 (recognition of three common-law definitions of assault)
State v. Godsey, 131 Wn. App. 278 (assault where defendant stepped toward officer with fists up)
State v. Calvin, 176 Wn. App. 1 (assault where defendant advanced on lone ranger in isolated area)
State v. Montano, 169 Wn.2d 872 (elements required for intimidating a public servant)
Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 (due process limits on indefinite confinement of incompetent defendants)