Respondent's Brief - Washington State Courts

indicator for child sexual abuse." RP 647-48. Given the testimony of
Ellsworth and Wiseter, it seems reasonable to infer, as the deputy
prosecutor did in the latter portion of the second sentence, that bedwetting
in a previously "potty-trained" child "can be relevant in treating
someone's mental health, can be part of anxiety, it's simply something
noteworthy, less so obviously to the medical professionals." RP 797.
Thus, the contested argument was no more than an accurate
summary of evidence in the record coupled with a reasonable inference
drawn from that evidence. Because "[ flhe State is generally afforded wide
latitude in making arguments to the jury and prosecutors are allowed to
draw reasonable inferences from the evidence," State v. Anderson, 153
Wn. App, 417, 427-28, 220 P.3d 1273 (2009), this argument cannot be
considered improper.
Therefore, the defendant has failed to show prosecutorial
misconduct and his conviction should be affirmed.
4. THE TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GRANTED THE
TRIAL CONTINUANCES BECAUSE THOSE
CONTINUANCES DID NOT VIOLATE DEFENDANT'S
RIGHTS TO SPEEDY TRIAL AS PROTECTED BY THE
TIME FOR TRIAL PROVISIONS OF CRR 3.3.
Under the time for trial provisions of Criminal Rule (CrR) 3.3,
A defendant who is detained in jail shall be brought
to trial within the longer of
i) 60 days after the commencement date specified
in this rule, or
36 - o ptest-pros m i scspttial-mcdan tel. doc