WA Legal Roundup
One new opinion of of Division I of the Court of Appeals today:
State v. Crittenden, Nos. 59809-1-I, 60581-0-I
A car thief objected to an instruction on lesser included as between 1st degree theft and 2d degree taking a motor vehicle without permission. The court also refused the defendant's instruction on the definition of intent to deprive.
The court reasoned that the additional element of motor vehicle was not present in 1st degree theft, and thus could not be a lesser included. Do you think this was the intention of the legislature? To allow both to be charged. Probably not. I understand the strict application of the Workman test obviously works against this.
Maybe its time to revisit Workman and disclude elements that only narrow the scope to which the law applies (cars instead of all property).
If you're criminal defense or prosecution and would like to weigh in, please do so.