271 P.3d 394
Wash. Ct. App.2012Background
- Lucas was convicted of second degree and fourth degree assault; the conviction was challenged on direct appeal and in a personal restraint petition.
- The trial court admitted evidence of Lucas's 2001 first degree robbery conviction to cross-examine the defense expert about Lucas's basis for his opinion.
- Lucas pursued a diminished capacity defense and his counsel sought a continuance and time to obtain mental health records and an expert; Lucas did not sign a speedy trial waiver.
- The defense presented psychiatrist Larsen and psychologist Kramer; Larsen relied on Lucas’s statements, among other factors, to support diminished capacity.
- The State cross-examined Larsen using Lucas’s prior conviction to challenge credibility and the basis of Larsen’s opinion.
- The appellate court reversed Lucas’s conviction for improper admission of prior-conviction evidence and remanded for further proceedings; the PRP was denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ER 806/how the prior conviction was used affected admissibility | Lucas | State | Abuse of discretion; not harmless |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bashaw, 169 Wash.2d 133 (2010) (standard for evidentiary abuse of discretion)
- State v. Rafay, 167 Wash.2d 644 (2009) (evidentiary rule interpretation and error review)
- State v. DeVincentis, 150 Wash.2d 11 (2003) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
- State v. Wineberg, 74 Wash.2d 372 (1969) (purpose of admitting testifying expert basis)
- Eaton, 30 Wash.App. 288 (1981) (cross-examining expert testimony to test credibility)
- State v. Anderson, 44 Wash.App. 644 (1986) (admission of out-of-court statements to explain expert opinion basis)