State Of Washington v. Hassen James, 75445-9

Defendant Hassen James was charged with second degree assault, unlawful imprisonment, and witness tampering; he opted to waive a jury and proceed to a bench trial.
Defense counsel told the court James intended to waive the jury; James initially resisted signing a written waiver but ultimately signed a waiver form acknowledging the right to a 12‑person jury.
The court conducted a brief colloquy: confirmed James understood a jury trial involved 12 King County citizens "selected at random," and found the waiver knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
James was convicted of unlawful imprisonment (domestic violence) and fourth degree assault (domestic violence); the court imposed a $500 Victim’s Penalty Assessment (VPA) and a $100 DNA collection fee.
On appeal James argued (1) the jury waiver was invalid because the court misstated jury selection as "selected at random," and (2) the mandatory VPA and DNA fee violated substantive due process.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of jury waiver	State: waiver valid because defendant personally and knowingly waived jury	James: court misstated jury selection (not truly "random" voir dire) rendering waiver uninformed	Court: waiver valid; James showed no practical or identifiable prejudice, and he personally expressed a knowing, voluntary waiver
Preservation of jury selection claim	State: James failed to timely object at trial	James: raised on appeal as constitutional error	Court: considered under RAP 2.5(a)(3) but declined review because no showing of practical consequences
Mandatory fees—VPA and DNA fee ripe challenge	State: challenges premature until collection attempted	James: fees not rationally related to legitimate state interest; substantive due process violation	Court: claim not ripe for review; in any event prior Washington appellate decisions uphold rational basis for both fees
Appeal costs	State: indicated it would not seek costs on appeal	James: argued about costs	Court: did not address because State will not seek them

State v. Roberts, 142 Wn.2d 471 (discusses requirement to show practical and identifiable consequences for unpreserved constitutional errors)
State v. Stegall, 124 Wn.2d 719 (waiver of jury trial valid so long as there is a personal expression of waiver)
City of Bellevue v. Acrey, 103 Wn.2d 203 (same principle on personal waiver requirement)
State v. Treat, 109 Wn. App. 419 (review standard for jury waiver)
State v. Castillo-Murcia, 188 Wn. App. 539 (knowing, intelligent, voluntary waiver standard)
State v. Shelton, 194 Wn. App. 660 (ripeness of fee challenges until collection attempted)
State v. Lewis, 194 Wn. App. 709 (upholding DNA collection fee against substantive due process challenge)
State v. Seward, 196 Wn. App. 579 (upholding VPA against substantive due process challenge)