State Of Washington, V. Christopher Decicio, 54206-4

On May 28, 2019, Lucas Anderson called 911 reporting that neighbor Christopher Decicio struck him with metal knuckles, pointed a gun at his head, and hit him with the gun; officer observed facial redness and swelling.
Police located and arrested Decicio after a SWAT deployment; officers did not recover the gun or brass knuckles and Decicio told detectives he had been home all day.
At trial Anderson testified to being struck and threatened; Decicio denied having weapons or assaulting Anderson and claimed he had been at the casino and did not recognize officers trying to contact him.
In closing the prosecutor emphasized witness credibility and argued from the physical injuries that Anderson was truthful, stating "we know Mr. Anderson is telling the truth and the defendant isn't," and argued acquittal would require believing in a conspiracy to frame Decicio; Decicio did not object at trial.
The jury convicted Decicio of third-degree assault; the court imposed 45 days first-offender sentence and community custody conditions. Decicio appealed, asserting prosecutorial misconduct and that some community custody conditions were not crime-related.

Issue	State's Argument	Decicio's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor committed reversible misconduct in closing by vouching for victim, expressing opinion of guilt, and implying acquittal required believing a conspiracy	Prosecutor argued reasonable inferences from evidence about credibility; comments were not improper or were curable by instruction	Prosecutorial comments vouched for witness, stated personal belief in guilt, and forced false choice that acquittal required finding State witnesses lied	Court held no reversible misconduct: statements were reasonable inferences, not clear personal vouching, and any prejudice could have been cured; defendant waived by not objecting
Whether community custody conditions related to home and work were an abuse of discretion as not crime-related	State did not concede abuse; court has discretion to impose conditions tied to community custody	Decicio argued conditions were unrelated to his assault conviction	Court declined to address in detail because Decicio failed to identify or argue specific conditions adequately; conviction and conditions affirmed

State v. Loughbom, 196 Wn.2d 64 (Wash. 2020) (standard: defendant must show comments were improper and prejudicial)
State v. Thorgerson, 172 Wn.2d 438 (Wash. 2011) (prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences including credibility)
State v. Emery, 174 Wn.2d 741 (Wash. 2012) (failure to object waives error unless misconduct so flagrant an instruction could not cure)
State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17 (Wash. 2008) (improper for prosecutor to vouch for witness or state personal belief)
State v. Brett, 126 Wn.2d 136 (Wash. 1994) (clear and unmistakable personal opinion by counsel required to find misconduct)
State v. Sargent, 40 Wn. App. 340 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985) (prosecutorial ‘‘I believe [the witness]’’ found prejudicial)
State v. Monday, 171 Wn.2d 667 (Wash. 2011) (improper appeals to bias and undermining presumption of innocence)
In re Personal Restraint of Glasmann, 175 Wn.2d 696 (Wash. 2012) (prosecutor’s explicit statements/presentation of guilt constituted reversible misconduct)
State v. Vassar, 188 Wn. App. 251 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015) (impermissible to present a false choice that acquittal requires finding State witnesses lied)
State v. Kirkman, 159 Wn.2d 918 (Wash. 2007) (jurors presumed to follow court instructions)