In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of Benjamin B. Brockie, No. 86241-9 (Sept. 26, 2013) (en banc)
Benjamin Brockie was charged by information for, among other things, first degree robbery. Brockie’s charging information indicated that “in the commission of an immediate flight therefrom, the defendant displayed what appeared to be a firearm or other deadly weapon.” (emphasis added). Critically, the charging information did not provide for the alternative means of committing first degree robbery–being armed with a deadly weapon. The jury instructions, however, did include this alternative charge. After Brockie’s trial, a jury convicted Brockie of, among other things two counts of first degree robbery. In response to these convictions and his subsequent sentencing, Brockie filed a pro se motion to vacate his judgment and sentence. Brockie’s motion argued that his conviction should be vacated because the jury was improperly instructed on the alternative means of committing first degree robbery, which was not contained in the charging information. The superior court where Brockie filed his motion considered it a personal restraint petition–a form of collateral attack–and transferred the motion to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals then transferred the motion to the Washington Supreme Court.
Continue Reading No Prejudice Where Jury Received Charging Instructions Not Included in Original Charging Information