298 P.3d 148
Wash. Ct. App.2013Background
- Wilson appeals jury-trial convictions for 13 counts of first-degree child rape of AH.
- He argues prevoir-dire administrative juror excusáis violated his right to a public trial and his right to be present.
- Two ill jurors were excused by the bailiff before voir dire began, under a court policy permitting administrative excusáis.
- The trial court offered to bring the excused jurors into the courtroom for Wilson’s presence, which he declined.
- Voir dire proceeded in open court with 14 jurors (plus 2 alternates); Wilson was convicted and appeals on public-trial and presence theories.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did prevoir-dire administrative juror excusáis implicate the public-trial right requiring Bone-Club analysis? | Wilson | Excusáis were administrative, notVoir dire; no Bone-Club analysis required | No; public-trial right not implicated by prevoir-dire administrative excusáis. |
| Did prevoir-dire administrative juror excusáis violate Wilson’s right to be present at all critical stages? | Wilson | Excusáis administrative, not case-specific; presence not required | No; absence was permissible under Irby and related authority. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Paumier, 176 Wn.2d 29 (Wash. 2012) (public-trial right extends to voir dire; Bone-Club analysis required for closures)
- State v. Wise, 176 Wn.2d 1 (Wash. 2012) (public-trial right applies to voir dire; closure analysis required in that context)
- State v. Sublett, 176 Wn.2d 58 (Wash. 2012) (adopts United States experience-and-logic test for public-trial attachment)
- In re Personal Restraint of Yates, 177 Wn.2d 1 (Wash. 2013) (applies Sublett test; confirms openness and logic framework now guide public-trial questions)
- State v. Irby, 170 Wn.2d 874 (Wash. 2011) (right to be present extends to voir dire; distinguishes pre-voir-dire administrative excusáis)