State Of Washington v. Kevin Robert Bowen, 47286-4

Background

In March 2014 deputies stopped Kevin Bowen driving a Ford Explorer registered to Kevin Kinslow; dispatch reported the vehicle stolen and Bowen was arrested. A baggie that field-tested positive for methamphetamine was found on Bowen.
A search of the Explorer revealed numerous items later identified as stolen (tools, electronics, two sets of Explorer keys, a lawn mower, drug paraphernalia, etc.). Everett Kinslow reported his son Kevin’s residence had been burglarized and vehicles taken days earlier.
Bowen pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance (no plea agreement) and proceeded to jury trial on possession of a stolen vehicle and second-degree possession of stolen property; the jury convicted on both counts.
Pretrial, the court excluded broad ER 404(b) evidence but admitted testimony about the prior burglary as part of the res gestae; evidence about thefts of two other vehicles was also admitted (later deemed erroneous but harmless).
Bowen was sentenced to 93 months confinement and various legal financial obligations (LFOs); he appealed challenging the charging documents, admission of burglary/theft evidence, ineffective assistance, sufficiency of the guilty-plea factual basis, and imposition of LFOs.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Bowen)	Held
Charging document sufficiency for possession of a stolen vehicle	Information contained essential elements and provided notice	Info omitted certain language/description and was insufficient	Information was sufficient under Porter reasoning; charging doc not deficient
Charging document sufficiency for possession of stolen property (2nd deg.)	Language alleged essential statutory elements and value threshold	Lacked description of specific property; risked vague notice/double jeopardy	Information contained essential elements; not deficient (bill of particulars available if needed)
Admission of burglary and other-vehicles-theft evidence	Evidence of burglary/res gestae relevant to prove items were stolen and Bowen’s knowledge	Evidence irrelevant/prejudicial; other-vehicle thefts were unrelated propensity evidence	Admission of burglary evidence was not an abuse; admission of thefts of other vehicles was error but harmless
Ineffective assistance for failure to object to drug paraphernalia in vehicle	Evidence was relevant and admissible; failure to object did not prejudice defendant	Counsel should have objected; evidence was prejudicial/propensity evidence	No ineffective assistance: objection would likely not have succeeded and no prejudice shown
Sufficiency of factual basis for guilty plea to possession of controlled substance	Probable cause statement and Bowen’s plea provide sufficient factual basis	Field test alone insufficient (relies on Colquitt)	Plea voluntary with adequate factual basis; conviction affirmed
Imposition of discretionary LFOs without ability-to-pay inquiry	LFOs may be imposed but court must conduct individualized inquiry into ability to pay	Court imposed LFOs without on-the-record individualized inquiry	Remanded for the trial court to conduct individualized ability-to-pay inquiry; appellate costs denied (defendant remained indigent)

Key Cases Cited

State v. Johnson, 180 Wn.2d 295 (discusses charging document review standard) (charging document adequacy reviewed de novo)
State v. Kjorsvik, 117 Wn.2d 93 (elements and facts must be alleged and charging documents construed sensibly)
State v. Tresenriter, 101 Wn. App. 486 (charging language for stolen-property offense sufficient without listing specific items)
State v. McCarty, 140 Wn.2d 420 (information sufficient if necessary elements appear or are reasonably implied)
State v. Darden, 145 Wn.2d 612 (low threshold for relevance of evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Drum, 168 Wn.2d 23 (distinguishing stipulated-evidence trials from guilty pleas)
State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827 (individualized ability-to-pay inquiry for discretionary LFOs)
State v. Colquitt, 133 Wn. App. 789 (field-test evidence alone insufficient in stipulated-evidence bench trial context)