State Of Washington, V Justin Michael Hart, 195 Wash. App. 449

Justin Hart was charged with one count of bail jumping for failing to appear at a September 9, 2013 pretrial hearing after a July 22 court order required his personal appearance.
Trial evidence: clerk who prepared/identified the July 22 order; a video of the July 22 hearing in which the judge set the September 9 date; the September 9 clerk’s minute showing Hart “did not” appear and a bench warrant issued; arrest pursuant to that warrant.
The jury was instructed using a to-convict instruction that required proof that Hart was released or admitted to bail with knowledge of a required subsequent personal appearance.
Hart was convicted; at sentencing the court imposed $2,025 in LFOs and incarceration costs without making an individualized inquiry into Hart’s ability to pay.
On appeal Hart challenged the jury instruction, sufficiency of evidence, confrontation-clause violations from admitting the order and video, and the failure to inquire into ability to pay. The State conceded error on the ability-to-pay inquiry.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the to-convict jury instruction omitted an essential element of bail jumping	Instruction failed to require proof that Hart failed to appear “as required”	Instruction tracked WPIC and included the required-element language (knowledge of required subsequent personal appearance)	Instruction was adequate; no due process violation
Whether evidence was sufficient to support bail jumping conviction	No proof he missed the specified time or that he had been released/admitted to bail	Clerk’s minute, testimony that he did not appear, bench-warrant request, stipulation and minutes showing he was booked/released supported inference of release and failure to appear	Evidence was sufficient; conviction upheld
Whether admitting the court order and July 22 video violated the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause	Order and video were testimonial hearsay because prepared statements came from persons who didn’t testify	Court records and judicial statements are non-testimonial (not created for prosecution); even if testimonial the video was cumulative and any error harmless	No confrontation violation; admission was permissible (or harmless)
Whether the sentencing court erred by imposing LFOs and incarceration costs without inquiry into ability to pay	Court failed to consider current/future ability to pay as required by statute and Blazina	State conceded error	Remand for individualized ability-to-pay inquiry; appellate costs waived

State v. Mills, 154 Wn.2d 1 (review of adequacy of jury instructions)
State v. Williams, 162 Wn.2d 177 (definition/elements of bail jumping)
State v. Coleman, 155 Wn. App. 951 (insufficiency where absence not shown at required time)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (testimonial hearsay and confrontation analysis)
State v. Jasper, 174 Wn.2d 96 (confrontation clause and harmless-error review)
State v. Hubbard, 169 Wn. App. 182 (public/court records are nontestimonial)
State v. Benefiel, 131 Wn. App. 651 (judgment/sentence documents non-testimonial)
State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827 (requirement to consider defendant’s ability to pay LFOs)
State v. Longshore, 141 Wn.2d 414 (sufficiency standard)
State v. Camarillo, 115 Wn.2d 60 (credibility for jury)