State of Washington v. JD Miller, 197 Wash. App. 180

JD Miller stabbed Christopher Bennett with a utility/knife during a confrontation outside Markham Welch’s house; Bennett required emergency surgery.
Miller was charged with first degree assault; convicted by a jury and sentenced to life as a persistent offender based on prior Idaho aggravated assault conviction.
At trial the prosecution introduced (over objections) evidence about Dustin Pearson’s flight and weapons found in Pearson’s car, and evidence that a television was found outside Welch’s house plus a note suggesting Welch suspected a burglary.
Miller testified he was at Welch’s to visit a cousin and acted in self-defense; prosecution argued Miller was more credible and committed first- or second-degree assault.
At sentencing the sole contested issue was whether the Idaho aggravated assault was equivalent to Washington second-degree assault; the trial court found equivalency and treated it as a strike.
Miller appealed, arguing (1) legal equivalency of the prior conviction, (2) evidentiary errors admitting prejudicial/irrelevant testimony and items, and (3) insufficient Blazina inquiry into ability to pay LFOs.

Issue	Miller's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether Idaho aggravated assault is legally equivalent to WA second-degree assault	Idaho offense not equivalent; differences in element wording alter equivalency	Statutes are substantially similar; both require threatened violence with a deadly weapon producing victim apprehension	Equivalent; Idaho aggravated assault counts as a WA "strike" for persistent offender sentencing
Admission of evidence about Pearson’s flight and weapons found in his car	Evidence was irrelevant/prejudicial (ER 401/403, and on appeal ER 404(b))	Evidence was relevant to Pearson’s credibility and to explain his disappearance; impeachment and "completing the story" justified admission	No abuse of discretion; evidence admissible for impeachment/credibility; ER 404(b) argument waived on appeal
Admission of Welch’s note and the television found outside the house	Irrelevant and unduly prejudicial (ER 401/403; argued ER 404(b) on appeal)	Note and TV were relevant to Welch’s credibility and to state’s burglary theory; admissible for impeachment	Admission was tenable and not unfairly prejudicial; trial court did not err; ER 404(b) not preserved
Imposition of discretionary legal financial obligations (LFOs) without Blazina inquiry	Trial court failed to conduct required Blazina inquiry into ability to pay	State did not dispute need for remand under Blazina	Remanded for the sentencing court to reconsider discretionary LFOs (may strike or hold hearings)

In re Pers. Restraint of Lavery, 154 Wn.2d 249 (2005) (foreign convictions count only if legally or factually comparable)
State v. Sublett, 176 Wn.2d 58 (2012) (de novo review for comparability of out-of-state convictions)
State v. Latham, 183 Wn. App. 390 (2014) (factual comparability inquiry when statutory elements differ)
State v. Luvene, 127 Wn.2d 690 (1995) (trial court evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Guloy, 104 Wn.2d 412 (1985) (failure to preserve specific evidentiary objections waives appellate review)
State v. Rafay, 167 Wn.2d 644 (2009) (abuse of discretion occurs when wrong legal standard applied)
State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827 (2015) (sentencing courts must inquire into defendant’s ability to pay discretionary LFOs)
State v. Maurer, 34 Wn. App. 573 (1983) (assault by creating apprehension requires physical action inducing reasonable apprehension)
State v. Frazier, 81 Wn.2d 628 (1972) (assault includes creating apprehension of bodily harm; intent to create apprehension required)
State v. Krup, 36 Wn. App. 454 (1984) (intent requirement for assault by creating apprehension)