State of Washington v. Richard Todd Ludvik, 33959-9

Ludvik was found inside an unoccupied house with antique doorknobs in his pocket and charged with residential burglary.
A deputy testified (without objection) that he delayed entry because he believed they were "starting to investigate an active residential burglary."
At trial defense requested a jury instruction for the lesser included offense of trespass but did not request an instruction for second degree burglary.
The jury convicted Ludvik of residential burglary.
On appeal Ludvik argued ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to object to the deputy's testimony and failure to request a second-degree burglary instruction), and in a SAG argued insufficient evidence of intent to steal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance — failure to request 2nd-degree burglary instruction	Ludvik: counsel unreasonably failed to request a lesser burglary instruction and prejudiced the defense	State: omission was reasonable strategy given small sentencing difference and trespass instruction	Court: No deficiency; trial strategy reasonable, no prejudice
Ineffective assistance — failure to object to officer testimony	Ludvik: counsel should have objected to officer's reference to "residential burglary" as improper opinion/testimonial inference	State: testimony was benign, explanatory about officer conduct, not an opinion on guilt	Court: No deficient performance; testimony was explanatory and objection likely would not have been sustained
Sufficiency of evidence — intent to steal	Ludvik (SAG): No evidence he intended to steal from the house	State: Circumstantial evidence (antique doorknobs in pocket) permits inference of intent	Court: Evidence sufficient; jury could infer intent from doorknobs in pocket
Request to deny appellate costs	Ludvik: asks court preemptively not to impose appellate costs if appeal fails	State: (implicit) costs may be assessed under usual rules	Court: Majority rejects request; appellate costs may be imposed per standard practice

State v. Grier, 171 Wn.2d 17 (addresses Strickland standard and when omission of lesser instruction can be reasonable trial strategy)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective assistance standard)
State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322 (presumption of effective assistance; defendant must overcome with record evidence)
State v. Rainey, 107 Wn. App. 129 (standard of review for ineffective assistance claims)
State v. Saunders, 91 Wn. App. 575 (failure-to-object claims require showing the objection would have been sustained)
State v. Quaale, 182 Wn.2d 191 (distinguishes when officer testimony improperly conveys opinion on disputed element)
State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192 (in sufficiency review, all inferences drawn in favor of the State)