State v. Powell

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that Jason Powell failed to preserve his challenge to the admission of methamphetamine-use evidence under ER 404(b). The court concluded that the alleged evidentiary error was not constitutional and did not warrant reversal, reversing the Court of Appeals and affirming Powell's conviction for attempted first-degree burglary. Separate opinions disagreed about whether the objection was preserved and whether admission of the evidence was harmless error.

Holdings

1. Powell failed to properly preserve for appeal his challenge to the admission of the methamphetamine-use testimony because trial counsel did not object on the ER 403 or other probative-value and prejudice grounds and did not object to the testimony when it was presented.
2. The alleged erroneous admission of ER 404(b) evidence was not an error of constitutional magnitude and therefore could not be reviewed as manifest constitutional error under RAP 2.5(a)(3).
3. Evidence of prior misconduct or drug use may be admitted under ER 404(b) for a nonpropensity purpose, including to show a defendant's state of mind, when its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect.
4. Powell failed to demonstrate manifest constitutional error, so the unpreserved evidentiary challenge did not warrant reversal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Powell preserved an objection to the admission of evidence that he ingested methamphetamine before the attempted burglary.
2. Whether the Court of Appeals could reverse based on the absence of expert testimony explaining the actual or potential effects of methamphetamine when that issue was not raised at trial or in the parties' briefs.
3. Whether the admission of the drug-use evidence constituted manifest constitutional error warranting appellate review despite the lack of a properly preserved objection.

Disposition

reversed