Appellant's Brief - Washington State Courts

verdict for eight of the counts of identity theft after the State voluntarily
dismissed five other counts due to the State inability to locate any
witnesses to support those counts. CP 41. Also as discussed above, the
evidence presented by the State failed to establish the necessary element of
intent as required by RCW 9.35.020.
The prosecutor knew all of the evidence the State would present at
trial and therefore was aware that there was no evidence to support the
inference that Mr. Hendrickson possessed the information with the intent to
commit or aid and abet any crime. The prosecutor knew the evidence was
insufficient to convict Mr. Hendrickson on any of the charges yet
proceeded to charge him and bring him to trial anyway. This was
prosecutorial misconduct and did not comport with "the prosecutor's duty
as an officer of the court to seek justice as opposed to merely obtaining a
conviction."
VI. CONCLUSION
This court should vacate Mr. Hendrickson7s convictions and
dismiss the charges against him. Alternatively, this court should remand
for a new trial, with instruction that the hearsay testimony presented by Mr.
Rogers is inadmissible.
-
DATED this 8 ~ of September, ~ 2006. a ~
Respectfblly submitted,