State Of Washington v. Shannon E. Meyer, 47676-2

In June 2011 Shannon Meyer stayed with his sister and, according to her five‑year‑old daughter KJC, twice pulled KJC into the kitchen, lowered his pants, shoved her face into his penis, and rubbed his genitals on her face.
KJC later lived with foster parents and disclosed the abuse to a counselor and her foster mother; she also participated in a recorded forensic interview describing the incident.
The State charged Meyer with first‑ and second‑degree rape and, alternatively, two counts of first‑degree child molestation; following a hearing, child hearsay statements were admitted and the forensic interview video was played at a bench trial.
The trial court convicted Meyer of attempted first‑degree child rape (and attempted second‑degree rape, the latter vacated for sentencing); the court imposed community custody conditions including a chemical dependency evaluation and drug/alcohol evaluation and treatment if recommended.
Meyer appealed, challenging sufficiency of the evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to object to certain hearsay and limited cross‑examination/closing), and two community custody conditions; the State conceded the custody conditions were improper.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for attempted 1st‑degree child rape	State: KJC’s testimony and forensic interview show Meyer intended intercourse and took a substantial step	Meyer: Inconsistent statements, possible coaching, no corroboration, no grooming	Affirmed — evidence sufficient; thrusting penis into child’s face was a substantial step
Ineffective assistance — failure to object to statements that Meyer lied	State: Any error was not prejudicial in a bench trial and judge presumed to disregard inadmissible evidence	Meyer: Failure to object allowed improper opinion on veracity to stand	Rejected — no prejudice; bench judge presumed to ignore and statements lacked the aura of official credibility
Ineffective assistance — limited cross‑examination/closing on memory inconsistency	State: Tactical decision; aggressive cross‑examination of a child could backfire and inconsistencies were already in the record	Meyer: Counsel should have highlighted forensic interview statements that she didn’t remember until prompted	Rejected — strategic choice; no deficient performance shown
Sentencing — community custody conditions for chemical dependency and drug/alcohol evaluation	State (concedes): Conditions unrelated to offense because no evidence drugs/alcohol contributed	Meyer: Conditions unrelated and thus unauthorized	Remand — conditions stricken; sentence otherwise affirmed

State v. Homan, 181 Wn.2d 102 (2014) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Johnson, 173 Wn.2d 895 (2012) (elements of attempt and substantial step analysis)
State v. Grier, 171 Wn.2d 17 (2011) (two‑part ineffective assistance test and presumption of reasonable strategy)
State v. Read, 147 Wn.2d 238 (2002) (bench court presumed to ignore inadmissible evidence)
State v. King, 167 Wn.2d 324 (2009) (limits on witness testimony about another’s veracity)
State v. Kirkman, 159 Wn.2d 918 (2007) (police officer opinion about truthfulness carries special weight)
State v. Rafay, 168 Wn. App. 734 (2012) (credibility determination is for the fact‑finder)
State v. Reichenbach, 153 Wn.2d 126 (2004) (need to show absence of any conceivable legitimate tactic to overcome presumption of effective counsel)
State v. Hamilton, 179 Wn. App. 870 (2014) (standard of review for ineffective assistance claims)
State v. Lewis, 156 Wn. App. 230 (2010) (cumulative error doctrine)
State v. Jones, 118 Wn. App. 199 (2003) (trial court may not impose sentencing conditions without statutory authority)
In re Pers. Restraint of Davis, 152 Wn.2d 647 (2004) (cross‑examination generally a matter of strategy)