State Of Washington, V Chad A. Tibbits
75649-4
| Wash. Ct. App. | Dec 5, 2016Background
- In April 2014, two-month-old A.T. was left with defendant Chad Tibbits and later found with severe head trauma, multiple bruises, healed and new fractures, malnutrition, and brain bleeding; Tibbits was the only caregiver present when the baby "stopped breathing."
- Tibbits and mother Katarina Shivers were charged with first-degree assault (alternative means) and second-degree criminal mistreatment; the jury convicted both and returned special verdicts finding manifest deliberate cruelty, vulnerable victim, and abuse of position of trust.
- Medical testimony (Dr. Feldman) described injuries as caused by multiple blunt-force events over time, not self-inflicted by the infant, and that malnutrition and untreated injuries created a high probability of death.
- Recorded statements from both Tibbits and Shivers (played at trial) placed Tibbits alone with the child when the injury occurred; Tibbits testified at trial, Shivers did not.
- Tibbits raised challenges on appeal: insufficient evidence (including as to alternative means), Confrontation Clause violation from admission of Shivers's statement, prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel (including failure to move for severance), and a sentencing error increasing the mandatory minimum.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Tibbits) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for assault in the first degree | Evidence (injuries, timing, Tibbits' statement) supports intent/alternative means and pattern of abuse | Evidence insufficient; Shivers could have inflicted injuries; injuries inconsistent with Tibbits' guilt | Affirmed — viewed in light most favorable to verdict, evidence supports convictions and alternative means |
| Sufficiency for criminal mistreatment (2nd degree) | Reckless withholding of medical care and malnutrition created imminent risk or caused substantial harm | Insufficient evidence of withholding or recklessness by Tibbits | Affirmed — evidence of prolonged injuries, malnutrition, and withholding supports conviction |
| Confrontation Clause re: admission of codefendant statement | Admission harmless: jury instructed not to use Shivers' statements against Tibbits and Tibbits' own identical statement was admitted | Admission violated confrontation rights because Shivers did not testify | Harmless error — no objection; instruction and identical statement by Tibbits make error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Sentencing finding increasing mandatory minimum | N/A (State concedes) | Court improperly made factual finding increasing mandatory minimum without jury | Remand for resentencing — trial court's finding violated Alleyne; jury must decide any fact increasing mandatory minimum |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (establishes State's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Ortega-Martinez v. State, 124 Wn.2d 702 (unanimity and alternative means rule under WA law)
- Witherspoon v. State, 180 Wn.2d 875 (sufficiency review standard — view evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
- Montgomery v. State, 163 Wn.2d 577 (jury may infer guilt despite alternative innocent explanations)
- Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (any fact that increases mandatory minimum is an element for the jury to decide)