State Of Washington v. Dale H. Oya, Iii, 47136-1

Background

On Feb 4, 2014, Dale Oya drove a van that struck his girlfriend Angel Boyd at a gas station; Boyd was injured and Oya left the scene without rendering aid. Police could not locate Oya that night.
On Feb 7 officers spotted the same van, attempted a traffic stop, and pursued it with lights and sirens; the van accelerated to an estimated 70–75 mph, slowed to 15–20 mph, a passenger (Jordan George) jumped from the moving van and was arrested after rolling on the ground.
Oya was charged with second-degree assault (acquitted), hit and run (failure to render aid), and attempting to elude a pursuing police vehicle (convicted), with a sentencing enhancement for endangering another person during eluding (found true).
The trial court denied Oya’s pretrial and renewed motions to sever the eluding count from the assault and hit-and-run counts; Oya argued he needed to testify only about eluding and that joinder prejudiced him.
At trial the State elicited testimony (including an officer’s hearsay recounting of George’s excited statements); the jury convicted on hit-and-run and eluding, found the endangerment enhancement, and the court imposed concurrent prison terms.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency — hit and run	State: evidence showed Oya left scene and failed to render required assistance	Oya: he stopped/offered aid and thus State failed to prove required element(s)	Conviction affirmed — evidence supported that Oya left without rendering required assistance despite briefly stopping and victim declining aid not excusing statutory duty
Sufficiency — attempting to elude (recklessness)	State: officer testimony of high speeds, pursuit with lights/sirens, passenger jumping from moving van supports reckless driving	Oya: driving not reckless; lack of other dangerous maneuvers	Conviction affirmed — speed and pursuit circumstances permit rational jury to find reckless driving
Sufficiency — endangerment enhancement	State: passenger forced to jump while van moving and officer actions endangered passenger	Oya: insufficient evidence passenger was endangered by Oya’s conduct	Enhancement affirmed — evidence that passenger jumped from moving van supports finding persons were threatened with physical harm
Confrontation Clause (admission of George’s out-of-court statements)	State: statements were cumulative and not critical; any error harmless beyond reasonable doubt	Oya: admission violated Confrontation Clause and prejudiced jury on multiple counts	Any Confrontation Clause error was harmless — untainted evidence was overwhelming and statements were cumulative
Ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to object to hearsay)	Oya: counsel should have objected on Confrontation grounds	State: any error was harmless, so no prejudice from counsel’s conduct	Denied — defendant cannot show prejudice under Strickland because outcome would not likely have changed
Severance (joinder of counts)	State: counts properly joined; evidence cross-admissible (flight/consciousness of guilt) and judicial economy favors joinder	Oya: joinder prejudiced his right to testify only on eluding without opening assault/hit-and-run matters	Denied — no manifest abuse of discretion; factors (strength of evidence, clarity of defenses, jury instructions, cross-admissibility, judicial economy) weigh against severance

Key Cases Cited

State v. Homan, 181 Wn.2d 102 (standard for sufficiency of evidence review)
State v. Hickman, 135 Wn.2d 97 (law-of-the-case doctrine regarding to-convict instructions)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance of counsel two-prong test)
State v. Russell, 125 Wn.2d 24 (severance/joinder abuse-of-discretion standard and severance factors)
State v. Roggenkamp, 153 Wn.2d 614 (definition of reckless driving)
State v. Freeburg, 105 Wn. App. 492 (evidence of flight and inferences of consciousness of guilt)