Court Opinion

ID: 9563444
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:39:52.60382+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:51.596582
License: Public Domain

Hunter, J.
(dissenting)—The majority has reversed a judgment entered upon a jury verdict, charging the defendant with “conducting himself in a disorderly manner by *524creating a disturbance ... in the presence of another by using abusive, lewd, vulgar or obscene language in the presence of another or by using loud, profane, vulgar or obscene or lewd language toward anyone. Towit: Volunteer Park.”
If, in fact, the defendant’s conduct was within the ambit of this charge, he was clearly in violation of the Pasco disorderly conduct ordinance which is as follows:
It is unlawful for any person to conduct himself or herself in a disorderly manner by creating a disturbance within the city in the presence of another by fighting or arguing or using abusive, lewd, vulgar, or obscene language in the presence of another, or by using loud, profane, vulgar, obscene or lewd language toward anyone or by urinating in public view or by having his or her clothing in such disarray that he or she would appear indecent to the general public.
Pasco City Code 9.04.020 (formerly § 10-5.156).
The majority has held the ordinance to be constitutional, with which I agree, but it has gone at great length to detail the conflicting facts and comes up with a resulting opinion in disagreement with the superior court jury on this factual situation.
It is not within the province of this court to disturb a jury verdict upon conflicting evidence where there is substantial evidence to support its findings.
Here the police not only suspicioned that narcotics were being bought and sold within the group of individuals that were frequenting the park, but they had warrants for the arrest of four individuals who they believed to be in the park on the occasion in question. This was a well planned and conceived raid by the Pasco police to stop dope traffic in their city public park. I can see nothing unreasonable under these circumstances when the police converged on these users of the park to require them to sit down and keep their hands in sight until the raid was completed, after advising them the purpose of the raid. Most of the occupants complied—but not the defendant, Douglas Dix-son. Substantial evidence in the record shows that he threw *525his cigarettes on the ground to taunt the police and, in the earshot of a substantial number of others present, used the language, “Shit, you pigs got no right;” that he embraced a young girl sitting next to him, kissing her and placing her on the ground in a prone position; that he refused to leave the park when later requested, all of which incited others to disobey the officers, creating a disturbance in public. He was arrested, and oh the way to the paddy wagon substantial evidence shows that he yelled about six times, “fuck you pigs; you got no rights,” during which time other people were running and yelling and being arrested.
The jury had no difficulty in determining the defendant used vulgar and obscene language in public and creating a disturbance by arguing and using abusive language. Neither do I. The language used in arguing with the officers was lewd and vulgar and clearly within the ambit of the Pasco disorderly conduct ordinance. Officers should not be hamstrung in their effort to protect the public from being subjected to such vile language used by the defendant, and in restraining the creation of a disturbance in public.
I would affirm.
Hamilton, C. J., and Stafford, J., concur with Hunter, J.