State Of Washington v. Isaac Joseph Quitiquit
48543-5
| Wash. Ct. App. | Sep 12, 2017Background
- Defendant Isaac Quitiquit, EU’s uncle, was charged with two counts of third-degree child rape for oral and digital sexual contact with EU when she was 14.
- Incidents occurred on two separate occasions; EU later reported to a counselor and law enforcement was notified.
- At trial, the court repeatedly instructed jurors not to discuss the case outside deliberations and read a general unanimity instruction before deliberations.
- Jury convicted Quitiquit on both counts; trial court sentenced him to 34 months confinement plus 36 months community custody on each count, to run concurrently (total 70 months).
- Quitiquit appealed, raising (1) a jury unanimity instruction claim, (2) that his combined confinement and community custody exceeded the statutory maximum, and (3) asking the court to waive appellate costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jury unanimity instruction | State: jury instructions were adequate | Quitiquit: court failed to instruct that deliberations require all 12 jurors present, risking nonunanimous deliberations | Not considered on appeal—Quitiquit failed to raise at trial and did not show manifest constitutional error on the record |
| Sentencing exceed statutory maximum | State: conceded error | Quitiquit: combined confinement + community custody (70 months) exceeds class C felony max (60 months) | Remand for trial court to reduce community custody so combined term ≤ statutory maximum |
| Appellate costs | State: may seek costs under RAP 14.2 | Quitiquit: asked waiver of appellate costs | Court declined to rule now; cost bill process under RAP 14.2 applies |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ortega-Martinez, 124 Wn.2d 702 (recognizes right to unanimous jury verdict under state constitution)
- State v. Lamar, 180 Wn.2d 576 (explains unanimity as consensus from jurors’ rational deliberation)
- State v. Elmore, 155 Wn.2d 758 (constitutional right to unanimous jury verdict discussed)
- State v. O’Hara, 167 Wn.2d 91 (error is manifest only if record suffices to determine prejudice)
- State v. Boyd, 174 Wn.2d 470 (trial court must reduce community custody to avoid exceeding statutory maximum)
- State v. Hernandez, 185 Wn. App. 680 (trial court errs when confinement + community custody exceed statutory maximum)