Proving the Use of Force Was Lawful in Washington Assault Cases

In Tacoma, Washington assault cases, defendants do not have to offer a defense or otherwise establish that they did not commit the charged offense. In many instances, though, a defendant will argue that the actions out of which their charges arose were taken in self-defense and, therefore, were lawful. If the State disproves a defendant’s self-defense argument beyond a reasonable doubt, however, the defendant may be found guilty.

In many cases, there are numerous defenses a person can assert, including self-defense. Recently, a Washington court explained what evidence a defendant must set forth to demonstrate that an action was taken in self-defense, in a matter in which the defendant appealed his conviction for assault with a deadly weapon. If you are charged with assault, it is vital to meet with a dedicated Washington assault defense attorney to discuss your possible defenses.

Proving an Assault Constitutes Self-Defense

Under Washington law, to obtain a conviction for assault, the State must prove that the defendant acted with the intent to cause great bodily harm and did, in fact, inflict significant harm. If a defendant raises a claim that he was acting in self-defense, the burden shifts to the State to demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant was not acting in self-defense.

Evidence showing that acts were undertaken in self-defense is evaluated from the standpoint of a reasonably prudent person, with all of the defendant’s knowledge viewing a situation through the defendant’s eyes. The use of reasonable force in self-defense is justified where there appears to be a threat of imminent harm. The amount of force permitted is limited, however, to what a reasonably prudent person would find necessary under the conditions present at the time of the alleged act. A successful claim of self-defense negates criminal intent.

Example 1: Verbal Instigation

It is alleged that the defendant and the victim were both high school students. The defendant was approximately 200 pounds lighter than the victim, but both appeared to be in reasonably fit condition. They had a verbal altercation, during which the defendant called the victim a gay slur, and the victim stated he was gay.

Reportedly, they had a second encounter later in the day that escalated into a physical altercation. The victim approached the defendant and slapped him on the arm, after which the two fell to the ground. The victim was striking the defendant when the defendant pulled a knife out of his pocket and stabbed the victim repeatedly. The defendant was charged with assault in the first degree. During the trial, he argued he acted in self-defense. The judge rejected the defense and found him guilty of assault in the second degree, and he appealed.

Proving the Use of Force Was Lawful

The court elaborated that the term necessary means that there was no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force at the time, and the amount of force employed was reasonable to effect to purpose intended. In the subject case, the court noted that the defendant seemed to concede that he used deadly force against the victim. Thus, as he failed to prove that he believed his life was in jeopardy, the amount of force used was not reasonable, and the judge properly rejected his assertion he acted in self-defense.

Example 2: Life Threatening Injuries

It is reported that the defendant lived with his wife in an apartment, and his mother-in-law and father-in-law lived in the same complex. The defendant became abusive towards his wife, and she obtained a no-contact order against him, but she continued to live with him regardless. She eventually told him she wanted a divorce due to his behavior. The following day, she left the apartment to take their children to school and returned home after a short time. When she arrived in her apartment, she found her mother bleeding on the floor. The mother, who suffered critical injuries, indicated that the defendant had assaulted her. The defendant was charged with multiple crimes, including first-degree assault with a deadly weapon. He was convicted of assault, after which he filed an appeal, arguing in part that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not acting in self-defense.

In the subject case, the State produced evidence showing the amount of force used by the defendant and showed that the victim suffered life-threatening injuries. Thus, the court found that even if the victim was the aggressor, the defendant’s acts were not justified as self-defense. As such, his conviction was affirmed.

Speak with Our Assault Defense Attorneys

Actions that may constitute grounds for charging a person with an assault crime might be lawful if they were taken in self-defense. If you are accused of assault, it will benefit you to speak to an attorney about your possible defenses. The capable Tacoma criminal defense lawyers of The Law Offices of Smith & White have the knowledge and resources needed to help you pursue a favorable verdict, and if you hire us, we will zealously pursue the best result possible under the facts of your case. You can contact us via our form online or by calling us at (253) 203-1645 to set up a meeting.