State Of Washington v. Leland Jordan, 72728-1

Background

Leland Jordan was charged with felony harassment for threatening hospital staff, including Dr. Sachita Shah; he later failed to appear for a January 17, 2014 court date and was charged with bail jumping.
Jordan unequivocally waived counsel and proceeded pro se in October 2013 and signed a written waiver; the court engaged in additional on-the-record colloquies and Jordan signed a later amended waiver after bail-jumping was added.
Jordan repeatedly complained about lack of jail access to discovery and at times expressed doubt about his ability to proceed pro se, but consistently asserted the desire to represent himself and later declined appointment of counsel (asking instead for non‑attorney help).
Jordan entered an Alford plea to both counts (harassment and bail jumping); the court appointed standby counsel for sentencing and Jordan was sentenced to concurrent 51‑month terms based on an offender score the State calculated.
On appeal Jordan challenged (1) the validity of his faretta waiver and whether a new colloquy was required, (2) sufficiency of the factual basis for the Alford plea to felony harassment, and (3) adequacy of the information charging bail jumping; the Court of Appeals affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Jordan's Argument	State/Court Argument	Held
Whether the trial court violated the right to counsel by not conducting a new colloquy after delays and equivocal statements	Jordan said the long lapse (Oct 2013→Aug 2014), his equivocal statements about wanting counsel, and changed circumstances required a fresh waiver colloquy	The original waiver was knowing, voluntary, and repeatedly reaffirmed; lapse was largely due to Jordan's nonappearance and he continued to assert self‑representation	Court held no new colloquy was required; waiver remained valid and the court did not abuse discretion
Whether addition of the bail‑jumping charge required a new waiver colloquy, including advising of maximum penalty	Jordan argued new charge changed the bargain and required being re‑advised of consequences	Jordan signed an amended waiver acknowledging maximum penalties; precedent (Modica) rejects requirement of a full new colloquy for added charges when defendant reaffirms waiver	Court held no new full colloquy required; amended waiver and reaffirmations sufficed
Whether an independent factual basis supported Jordan’s Alford plea to felony harassment	Jordan contended the record lacked proof Dr. Shah was specifically threatened and lacked evidence she had reasonable fear the threat would be carried out	The certification of probable cause detailed multiple specific threats (references to getting an AK‑47, past shootings) and Dr. Shah’s stated fear; Alford plea permits reliance on independent sources like probable cause	Court held the certification and prosecutor summary provided a sufficient factual basis for the Alford plea
Whether the information charging bail jumping was deficient for failing to allege Jordan knew the specific court date he missed	Jordan argued the information failed to allege he had notice of the particular date (knowledge element)	The information alleged failure to appear on January 17, 2014 and alleged knowledge of the requirement to appear; charging documents are construed liberally and may imply the specific‑date knowledge	Court held the information sufficiently alleged the elements (including implied knowledge of the date) and was adequate to give notice

Key Cases Cited

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (recognizing constitutional right to self‑representation)
North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (permitting plea while maintaining innocence when defendant concedes evidence sufficient to convict)
State v. Modica, 136 Wn. App. 434 (trial court not required to conduct a new full colloquy when information is amended and defendant reaffirms waiver)
State v. Luvene, 127 Wn.2d 690 (waiver of counsel must be unequivocal in context of record)
State v. Kjorsvik, 117 Wn.2d 93 (charging document must provide notice of essential elements; construed liberally on appeal)