Case Name: The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Barton Stanley Rodom, Appellant
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1968-11-27
Citations: 74 Wash. 2d 944
Docket Number: No. 39984
Parties: The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Barton Stanley Rodom, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 74
Pages: 944–945

Head Matter:
[No. 39984.
Department Two.
November 27, 1968.]
The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Barton Stanley Rodom, Appellant.
Carl L. Loy, for appellant.
Lincoln E. Shropshire and Patrick H. Ohoell, for respondent.
Reported in 447 P.2d 603.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The appellant, Barton Stanley Rodom, was convicted of first degree forgery by check. The state's principal witness was his accomplice, Dale Masterman, who testified that the appellant wrote the check in question and accompanied Masterman to the store where the latter cashed the check. At the trial no instruction regarding the weight to be given to the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice was presented to the jury. The appellant, although represented by counsel, made no request for such instruction, but now predicates error on the trial court's failure to submit, on its own motion, the cautionary instruction to the jury.
This court has held that the trial court is not obligated to give a cautionary instruction concerning the testimony of an accomplice when none has been requested. State v. Proctor, 71 Wn.2d 882, 885, 431 P.2d 703 (1967).
In accord with such view, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.