Opinion ID: 2632445
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Motion to suppress evidence of threats made to a witness

Text: ¶ 104 Cobabe also challenges the trial court's denial of his request to suppress evidence of threats against a witness where there was no evidence that Cobabe made the threats or that they related to the case. ¶ 105 An evidentiary error is not of constitutional magnitude and is prejudicial only if `within reasonable probabilities, the outcome of the trial would have been materially affected had the error not occurred.' State v. Bourgeois, 133 Wash.2d 389, 403, 945 P.2d 1120 (1997) (quoting State v. Tharp, 96 Wash.2d 591, 599, 637 P.2d 961 (1981)). The error is harmless if the evidence is of minor significance in reference to the overall, overwhelming evidence as a whole. Id. (quoting Nghiem v. State, 73 Wash.App. 405, 413, 869 P.2d 1086 (1994)). ¶ 106 At issue here is Joslin's testimony that someone threatened her because she called 911 and that someone threw a rock through her window. Joslin did not identify who made the threat and did not see who threw the rock. She did not refer to a robbery. She did not refer to the CD/DVD player. Her testimony about the threat was disjointed, difficult to follow, and represented a minute part of the record. It is highly unlikely that it materially affected the outcome of Cobabe's robbery trial. ¶ 107 We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Cobabe's motion to suppress the evidence of threats made to a witness because the error was harmless.