State Of Washington, V Jacob L. Perry, 49567-8

Background

Juvenile Jacob Perry pleaded guilty to one count of fourth degree assault; plea form and court colloquy indicated he understood he assaulted D.A. and that fourth degree assault involves unlawful touching.
Court ordered a psychological evaluation by Dr. Keith Krueger, who reported family dysfunction: a restraining order against Perry’s father, mother’s alcohol dependency and refusal of in‑home counseling, and recommended institutional placement for ~1 year.
The State filed a disposition memorandum seeking a 52‑week manifest injustice disposition based on recent criminal history, high risk to reoffend, parental lack of control, and failure to accept responsibility; probation officer adopted the recommendation.
At disposition, Perry argued for a standard range disposition and noted an older sister willing to assume custody; the court found Perry dangerous, unable to follow orders, and that his parents lacked control.
The juvenile court imposed a 52‑week manifest injustice disposition (above the standard local sanctions range) relying on Dr. Krueger’s report and the State’s memorandum; Perry appealed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of guilty plea — whether Perry was informed of essential elements of 4th‑degree assault	Perry: plea involuntary because he wasn’t told common‑law assault elements (criminal intent; harmful/offensive touching)	State: pleadings and plea form/incorporated information advised of essential statutory element (intentional assault); common‑law elements are not required	Affirmed: plea was knowing/voluntary; statutory charging document and plea statement supplied essential elements
Use of State’s disposition memorandum — whether court improperly relied on bare allegations	Perry: memorandum contained bare allegations unsupported by proof; reliance improper (invoking Hunley)	State: court may consider all relevant materials and predisposition reports under RCW 13.40.150; Dr. Krueger’s evaluation supplied supporting evidence	Affirmed: court properly considered memorandum together with evaluator’s report and other materials; Hunley distinguishable
Parental lack of control as aggravating factor — whether sufficiently substantial/compelling to justify manifest injustice disposition	Perry: parental lack of control was not substantial/compelling; sister’s offer of custody undermines factor	State: record shows restraining order, mother’s alcohol dependence, parents enabling conduct, and evaluator’s recommendation for out‑of‑home placement	Affirmed: lack of parental control was supported by record and is a sufficient aggravating factor to justify manifest injustice disposition
Standard for proof supporting manifest injustice finding	Perry: argued facts must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt or specified in record	State: statutory standard is clear and convincing evidence for manifest injustice finding; court may rely on predisposition reports	Affirmed: manifest injustice finding must be supported by clear and convincing evidence; evaluator’s report satisfied that standard

Key Cases Cited

State v. R.L.D., 132 Wn. App. 699 (discussing due process for juvenile pleas)
State v. S.M., 100 Wn. App. 401 (presumption plea is voluntary when defendant signs and acknowledges plea statement)
In re Pers. Restraint of Hews, 108 Wn.2d 579 (plea must state essential elements and necessary facts)
State v. Elmi, 166 Wn.2d 209 (use of common‑law definitions for assault when statute does not define term)
State v. Davis, 119 Wn.2d 657 (common‑law assault definitions are not essential elements of fourth degree assault)
State v. Tai N., 127 Wn. App. 733 (standards for manifest injustice dispositions)
State v. T.E.C., 122 Wn. App. 9 (evaluator’s recommendations can supply clear and convincing evidence for aggravating factors)
State v. Hunley, 175 Wn.2d 901 (prosecutor must introduce evidence to support prior conviction allegations; distinguishes bare assertions)
State v. T.E.H., 91 Wn. App. 908 (parental inability to control child increases risk to society supporting out‑of‑range disposition)
State v. E.J.H., 65 Wn. App. 771 (review of entire record, including oral ruling, in manifest injustice analysis)
State v. Jarvis, 160 Wn. App. 111 (touching is unlawful if harmful or offensive)