IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent,

v. STETSON G. TEDDER, Appellant. No. 72019-8-

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED: November 9, 2015 3E

o IN5
Verellen, J. — Stetson Tedder appeals his convictions for assault of a child in the second degree and unlawful imprisonment, arguing thatthe trial court's reasonable doubt instruction was constitutionally deficient. We affirm. On January 12, 2013, four-year-old M.T. spentthe night at the home ofher 

### paternal grandmother, Corinne Smith. The following morning, when Smith was giving M.T. a bath, Smith noticed red welts all over M.T.'s body that "looked like chicken pox."1 

### M.T. told Smith that Tedder, her stepfather, "had shot herwith the gun."2 Smith took M.T. to the home ofSmith's sister, Regina Hinton, and told M.T. to show Hinton the 

### "chicken pox."3 M.T. told Hinton "theyweren't chicken pox" and thatTedder "got mad 

### and shot her with the BB gun" because she woke himup.4

1Report ofProceedings (RP) (Mar. 25, 2014) at 96. 2 \± at 97. 3 \± at 99. 4jd at 99, 115-16.No. 72019-8-1/2 

### Smith took M.T. to the hospital where M.T. told a forensic nurse examinerthat "she got shot by herdaddy with a BB gun."5 M.T. also disclosed that Tedder had tied her wrists and her ankles with zip ties. The nurse observed abrasions on M.T.'s wrists and 

### ankles consistentwith being tied with zip ties. M.Tsubsequently told two separate Child Protective Services social workers and a child interview specialistthat Tedderwould 

### shoot her with a BB gun or tie her up with zip ties when she got in trouble. Asearch of Tedder's home revealed plastic zip ties and an Airsoft rifle that shot plastic BBs. The State charged Tedder with one count of assault of a child in the second 

### degree and one count of unlawfulimprisonment. The State alleged that each charge involved two aggravating factors: domestic violence and deliberate cruelty. At trial, the court instructed thejury on reasonable doubt using the standard Washington Pattern Jury Instruction(WPIC) 4.01: The defendant has entered a plea of not guilty. That plea puts in issue every element ofthe crime charged. The State is the plaintiffand has the burden of proving each element ofeach crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant has no burden ofproving that a reasonable doubt exists as to these elements. A defendant is presumed innocent. This presumption continues throughout the entire trial unless during your deliberations you find ithas been overcome by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. A reasonable doubt is one for which a reason exists and may arise from the evidence or lack of evidence. It is such a doubt as would exist in the mind of a reasonable person afterfully, fairly, and carefully considering all ofthe evidence or lack of evidence. If, from such consideration, you have an abiding beliefinthe truth ofthe charge, you 

### are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt.[6]

5RP(Mar. 26, 2014) at 41. 611 Washington Practice: Washington Pattern Jury Instructions: Criminal 4.01, at 85 (3d ed. 2008) (emphasis added).No. 72019-8-1/3 A jury found Tedder guilty ofassault of a child inthe second degree and unlawful imprisonment. Thejury also found by special verdict that both crimes involved domestic violence. Tedder appeals. Tedder claims that that the instruction defining reasonable doubt as a doubt "for which a reason exists" was constitutionally deficient because itrequired thejury to articulate a reason for having a reasonable doubt. Relying on State v. Emery, Tedder 

### also argues that the instruction resembles the improper "fill inthe blank" arguments that 

### may constitute prosecutorial misconduct.7 Tedder concedes that the trial court's instruction was identical to WPIC 4.01 and 

### that our Supreme Court has directed trialcourts to use WPIC 4.01 to instruct juries on 

### the burden of proof and the definition ofreasonable doubt.8 OurSupreme Court 

### recently reaffirmed thatWPIC 4.01 is"the correctlegal instruction on reasonable doubt" and rejected any suggestion thatWPIC 4.01 requires ajurytoarticulate a reasonfor 

### having areasonable doubtoris akin to animproper"fill intheblank" argument.9 Our Supreme Courtdecisions control.10
Affirmed.

WE CONCUR: 

# Vf^/w^(.\h ^^fefe^

7 174 Wn.2d 741, 760, 278 P.3d 653 (2012). 8State v. Bennett, 161 Wn.2d 303, 318, 165 P.3d 1241 (2007). 9 State v. Kalebauqh, 183 Wn.2d 578, 586, 355 P.3d 253 (2015). 10 State v. Gore, 101 Wn.2d 481, 486-87, 681 P.2d 227 (1984). 3