State Of Washington v. Stacy Thornton, 46965-1

On Jan. 2, 2014, Stacy Thornton pawned a platinum ring later identified by Detective Chris Johnstone as stolen in a burglary; Thornton obtained the ring from Marcus Hodnett.
Hodnett admitted stealing the ring, told police the story, and testified at trial that he asked Thornton to pawn it because he lacked ID; Hodnett said he told Thornton the ring was stolen.
Kelly Olsen, a fellow homeless drug user, testified that theft and pawning stolen goods to fund drug habits was common among homeless addicts and that Thornton knew the ring was stolen.
Thornton testified he was told the ring belonged to Hodnett’s grandfather and claimed he only learned it was stolen about a week after pawning it; he admitted awareness that people steal to fund drugs.
The jury convicted Thornton of first degree trafficking in stolen property; he appealed alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for (1) failure to object to propensity/culture evidence and (2) failure to object to an officer’s opinion on guilt. The court also addressed appellate costs and waived them due to presumed indigency.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Counsel failed to object to testimony about theft being common among homeless drug addicts (propensity/culture evidence)	Thornton: testimony constituted inadmissible propensity evidence under ER 404(b) and counsel was ineffective for not objecting	State: evidence admissible to prove knowledge under ER 404(b); it was relevant to show Thornton’s knowledge that the ring was stolen	Court: Counsel not deficient — the testimony was admissible to prove knowledge under ER 404(b); claim fails
Counsel failed to object to Detective Johnstone’s opinion that Thornton knew the ring was stolen (impermissible opinion on ultimate issue)	Thornton: officer expressed an opinion on the ultimate issue and counsel’s failure to object was ineffective assistance	State: even if testimony was improper, there was both direct and strong circumstantial evidence (Hodnett, Olsen, Thornton’s admissions) of knowledge, so no prejudice	Court: Assumed deficiency but found no prejudice — outcome would not likely differ; claim fails
Award of appellate costs	Thornton: seeks waiver due to inability to pay; trial court had entered indigency for appeal	State: sought appellate costs	Court: Exercised discretion and waived appellate costs under RCW 10.73.160(1) given presumptive indigency

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322 (1995) (standard of review and strong presumption of reasonableness for counsel performance)
State v. Grier, 171 Wn.2d 17 (2011) (defendant must show absence of any conceivable tactical explanation for counsel’s conduct)
State v. Thomas, 109 Wn.2d 222 (1987) (prejudice requires reasonable probability of different outcome)
State v. Madison, 53 Wn. App. 754 (1989) (decision whether and when to object is classic trial tactic)
In re Pers. Restraint of Davis, 152 Wn.2d 647 (2004) (strategic decision to forgo objection to avoid highlighting evidence)
State v. Gerdts, 136 Wn. App. 720 (2007) (when claim rests on failure to object, defendant must show objection likely would have succeeded)
State v. Sinclair, 192 Wn. App. 380 (2016) (discusses appellate cost assessment; relevant to waiver request)