State Of Washington v. Chad C. Whitney, 73953-1

Chad Whitney was arrested Sept 12, 2012; charged Dec 13, 2012 with possession of methamphetamine after a pipe was found during search incident to arrest.
A hearing was set for Sept 20, 2013; Whitney signed an order acknowledging the date and was released on his personal recognizance (PR).
Whitney failed to appear at the Sept 20 hearing; a bench warrant and amended charges (including bail jumping and identity theft) followed.
At trial the State admitted court documents relating to the hearing and Whitney testified that he had been "PR'd," received his court dates, and mistakenly missed the appearance.
The jury convicted Whitney of possession and bail jumping; the trial court imposed discretionary legal financial obligations (LFOs) without an ability-to-pay inquiry and denied appellate costs to Whitney by entering an indigency order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for bail jumping (whether release was by court order)	State: Proof of hearing order, clerk minutes, bench warrant, officer testimony and Whitney's own admission that he was PR'd suffice	Whitney: No court release order was introduced; no witness testified about release circumstances, so element not proven	Conviction affirmed — Whitney's testimony that he was "PR'd," combined with documents and officer testimony, provided circumstantial evidence that release was by court order
Imposition of discretionary LFOs without ability-to-pay inquiry	State: did not dispute absence of inquiry; argued remand cost-benefit should weigh against reversal	Whitney: Trial court erred by imposing discretionary LFOs without individualized inquiry into current and future ability to pay	Remanded — court must conduct individualized ability-to-pay inquiry before imposing discretionary LFOs
Award of appellate costs to State	State: argued Whitney’s indigency may not be permanent and costs should be awarded	Whitney: trial court found indigency and authorized counsel at public expense; no evidence of future ability to pay	Court declined to award appellate costs to State, presuming Whitney remains indigent

State v. Joy, 121 Wn.2d 333, 851 P.2d 654 (discusses standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192, 829 P.2d 1068 (all reasonable inferences drawn for State on review)
State v. Malvern, 110 Wn. App. 811, 43 P.3d 533 (elements of RCW 9A.76.170 defined)
State v. Delmarter, 94 Wn.2d 634, 618 P.2d 99 (circumstantial and direct evidence given equal weight)
State v. Goodman, 150 Wn.2d 774, 83 P.3d 410 (same principle on evidence weight)
State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827, 344 P.3d 680 (requirement of individualized ability-to-pay inquiry before imposing discretionary LFOs)
State v. Sinclair, 192 Wn. App. 380, 367 P.3d 612 (declining appellate costs where defendant previously adjudged indigent and future ability to pay unlikely)