State v. Butler, 165 Wash. App. 820

Butler/kidnapping, burglary, robbery and assault convictions after home invasion for drugs/money
Butler hospitalized with gunshot injuries; police interview occurred in hospital while on pain meds
Court denied suppression of Butler’s hospital confession, finding noncustodial or voluntary Miranda waiver
Prosecution argued kidnapping not incidental to robbery, and sufficient evidence supported independent kidnapping conviction
Jury instructed on homeowner’s defense with deadly force; appellate court addressed self-defense instruction as proper law
Evidence supported separate convictions for kidnapping and robbery; merger doctrine applicable but not satisfied here

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was Butler's hospital statement voluntary	Butler contends coercive conditions due to meds and illness	Butler asserts lack of capacity to waive rights	Statement voluntary; not in custody or involuntary
Do kidnapping and robbery merge or can there be separate convictions?	Kidnapping incidental to robbery; merger should apply	Kidnapping and robbery do not merge; separate conviction	Kidnapping does not merge with robbery; separate convictions upheld
Was there sufficient evidence of conspiracy to commit robbery?	Concert of action shown; Butler and Taylor planned robbery	No explicit agreement to commit robbery	Sufficient circumstantial evidence of agreement; conspiracy conviction sustained
Did the jury instruction on homeowner's deadly force violate due process or reflect improper judicial attitude?	No improper comment; instruction correct as law	Instruction could convey court bias	Instruction proper; did not reflect court opinion; affirmed

State v. Kelter, 71 Wn.2d 52 (1967) (hospital interrogation not custody when limited by illness)
State v. Vladovic, 99 Wn.2d 413 (1983) (merger doctrine governs kidnapping vs robbery)
In re Personal Restraint of Fletcher, 113 Wn.2d 42 (1989) (robbery and kidnapping do not merge; separate offenses exist)
State v. Louis, 155 Wn.2d 563 (2005) (robbery and kidnapping convictions affirmed; merger not required)
State v. Green, 94 Wn.2d 216 (1980) (sufficiency review; standard for elements of crime)
State v. Pacheco, 125 Wn.2d 150 (1994) (requires actual agreement for conspiracy; can rely on circumstantial evidence)
State v. Barnes, 85 Wn. App. 638 (1997) (circumstantial evidence admissible to prove conspiracy)