State of Washington v. Daniel Christopher Lazcano, 32228-9

Background

On December 27, 2011, Daniel and his brother Frank went to Nick Backman’s house seeking Marcus Schur (suspected of stealing property). Frank forcibly entered and assaulted occupants; Daniel waited outside with an AK-47 and shot Schur as he fled, killing him. The brothers later moved and attempted to dispose of the body and the rifle.
Daniel was tried multiple times: two earlier mistrials on the first-degree murder charge; convicted once of unlawful disposal of human remains (not appealed). After the second mistrial, the State and Daniel negotiated a plea to second-degree manslaughter (21–27 months), but the trial judge rejected the plea as inconsistent with the interests of justice.
Venue was changed to Spokane County for the third trial. The jury convicted Daniel of first-degree murder (premeditation and felony-murder alternative) and found he was armed; the trial court ordered felony-firearm registration.
Key contested pretrial and trial issues: trial court’s rejection of the plea agreement; excusal of a juror for financial hardship; admission and use of prosecution witness plea/immunity letters and testimony that they would testify truthfully; admissibility/use of Daniel’s nonverbal nods at postarrest questioning; sufficiency of evidence as to both alternate means (premeditation and felony burglary) and accomplice liability; and whether registration as a felony firearm offender was required.
Several witnesses had plea or immunity agreements (some admitted into evidence). The trial court excluded most of Daniel’s nonverbal responses to police questioning as Fifth Amendment violations except the first question and reserved impeachment use if Daniel testified. Defense did not object to many of the witness-truthful-agreement admissions at trial.

Issues

Issue	Daniel's Argument	State's/Other Argument	Held
Trial court rejected plea to 2nd-degree manslaughter	Rejection abused discretion; plea and amended information should have been accepted	Court has discretion under RCW and CrR to refuse plea inconsistent with interests of justice	Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; judge properly considered dishonesty/manipulation and disparity with co-defendant’s sentence (Haner/Conwell principles)
Excusal of juror for financial hardship	Excusal violated RCW 2.36.080(3) (no exclusion for economic status) and Sixth Amendment fair-cross-section	Excusal for undue hardship is permitted; single excusal not systematic discrimination	Affirmed — excusal for undue hardship was within trial court discretion; no systematic exclusion shown
Prosecutorial vouching via witness plea/immunity letters and closing argument	Prosecutor vouched for witnesses’ credibility by eliciting “testify truthfully” promises and asserting Evensen always told the truth	Some admissions were improper but defense had attacked credibility (opened door); failure to object limited relief; closing argument within permissible inference range (Warren, Ish guidance)	Mostly affirmed — limited error in admitting some plea/immunity language but harmless; prosecutor’s closing not reversible misconduct under the record
Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree murder (premeditation and felony-murder via 1st-degree burglary)	Insufficient: State relied on alternative means and failed to prove either beyond reasonable doubt; lacked evidence of Daniel’s knowledge/intent/preparation	Evidence of motive, planning, presence of rifle, multiple shots, statements, and accomplice conduct supported both premeditation and felony-burglary theories	Affirmed — viewed in light most favorable to State, evidence supports both premeditation and accomplice liability for burglary predicate
Felony-firearm offender registration	Must be a “felony firearm offender” (prior conviction) before registration required	RCW 9.41.330 authorizes the court to require registration upon conviction of a felony firearm offense; no prior conviction required	Affirmed — registration discretionary upon current conviction where the jury found firearm used; statute does not require prior firearm conviction

Key Cases Cited

State v. Haner, 95 Wn.2d 858 (trial court may refuse plea that is inconsistent with public interest)
State v. Conwell, 141 Wn.2d 901 (court reviews plea-rejection under discretion in RCW/CrR)
State v. Ish, 170 Wn.2d 189 (admissibility and risks of eliciting witnesses’ "testify truthfully" plea language)
State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17 (prosecutor may argue witness testimony has indicia or "ring" of truth where credibility is contested)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
State v. Carter, 154 Wn.2d 71 (felony-murder accomplice liability principles)
Thiel v. Southern Pac. Co., 328 U.S. 217 (jury service as a civic duty; hardship excusals)
Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357 (fair cross-section requirement for jury venire)
State v. Andress, 147 Wn.2d 602 (limits on using certain felonies as predicate for felony murder; distinguished here)
State v. Ra, 144 Wn. App. 688 (examples of circumstantial evidence supporting premeditation)