Summary
The Washington Supreme Court held that Jason Powell failed to preserve an objection to the admission of testimony that he ingested methamphetamine before an attempted burglary. The court concluded that the evidentiary issue was not constitutional and that Powell had not shown manifest constitutional error warranting review of the unpreserved claim. It reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed Powell’s conviction.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Powell preserved for appellate review an objection to the admission of methamphetamine-use evidence under ER 404(b) when trial counsel objected only on credibility grounds and did not object to the absence of expert testimony.
- Whether admission of the drug-use evidence without expert testimony explaining methamphetamine's possible effects constituted manifest constitutional error warranting reversal despite the lack of a proper trial objection.
Holdings
- Powell failed to preserve the challenge for appellate review because defense counsel did not object at trial on the ground later asserted on appeal. Counsel challenged the witness's credibility but did not argue that the evidence lacked probative value, was unfairly prejudicial, or required expert testimony.
- The alleged error was not constitutional in magnitude, and Powell failed to demonstrate manifest error. Accordingly, the Supreme Court would not review the unpreserved challenge and affirmed the conviction.
Key quotations
“We hold Powell failed to preserve his ER 404(b) objection for appeal and has failed to demonstrate any manifest constitutional error supporting reversal.” (at 75)
“Given defense counsel’s failure to properly object to Kincaid’s testimony at trial, the assignment of error is not properly preserved for appellate review.” (at 84)
“We hold defense counsel failed to properly object to the admission of the drug use testimony under ER 404(b) and the record does not show the admission of the drug use testimony constitutes manifest constitutional error.” (at 85)
Factual background
Powell had threatened his former girlfriend, Amber Williams, and had previously made threatening statements involving a gun. After an argument in which Williams told Powell she did not want him around their son, Powell went to her family's home and attempted to open the front and rear doors while Williams and her children were inside. Police arrested Powell at the residence, and a loaded handgun fell from his shorts. A roommate testified that Powell had ingested methamphetamine shortly before going to Williams's home and appeared agitated.
Procedural history
A jury convicted Powell of attempted first-degree burglary with a firearm. The Court of Appeals reversed, although it agreed that the drug-use evidence was admitted for a proper purpose, reasoning that expert testimony was needed to explain methamphetamine's actual or potential effects. The Washington Supreme Court granted the State's petition for review, reversed the Court of Appeals, and affirmed Powell's conviction.