Source: http://washapp.org/Opinion.aspx?id=168
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 14:42:13+00:00

Document:
estimated by the officer to be 70 miles per hour.  The zone was marked for 55.
Officer Radley turned on his sirens and emergency lights and pursued.
conviction from which this appeal is taken.
to bring the vehicle to a stop, shall be guilty of a class C felony.
in uniform and the vehicle shall be equipped with lights and sirens.
willfully [as to a particular fact] when he or she acts knowingly [as to that fact]."
at 214 (3d ed. 2008).
instruction was a correct statement of the law that should have been given.
pursuing police vehicle.  Willfulness in this context is identical with knowledge."
party.  See State v. Allen, 101 Wn.2d 355, 358-62, 678 P.2d 798 (1984).
technical term for a culpable mental state.  Allen, 101 Wn.2d at 362.
A trial court's failure to define a technical term may be harmless error.
outcome of the case."  State v. Britton, 27 Wn.2d 336, 341, 178 P.2d 341 (1947).
the offense of attempting to elude.  As the State reads the statute, "willfully"
unaware that he was being signaled to stop.
The first sentence of the statute is admittedly somewhat difficult to parse.
knowledge by the driver that there is "a pursuing police vehicle."  State v.
Trowbridge, 49 Wn. App. 360, 363, 742 P.2d 1254 (1987), citing State v.
Stayton, 39 Wn. App. 46, 49, 691 P.2d 596 (1984); see also Mather, 28 Wn.
vehicle is a police vehicle.
showing that the police markings on Officer Radley's car are only on the sides.
in which the jury will be instructed on the definition of "willfully."
even if the jury had been instructed on it.
missing witness would have been unfavorable to the party in the case.  State v.
State v. Montgomery, 163 Wn.2d 577, 601, 183 P.3d 267 (2008).
control of or peculiarly available to the State." We find no abuse of discretion.
pursuing police vehicle.  The court severed the two counts to avoid prejudice.
The second count was based on a separate incident on January 16, 2009.
same officer, driving the same vehicle, who had chased him before.
v. Castellanos, 132 Wn.2d 94, 97, 935 P.2d 1353 (1997).
credibility of Officer Radley's testimony was for the jury to decide, not this court.
ineffective in cross-examining Officer Radley.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 

v.