Facts: Petitioner Joshua Harvill was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance in the Superior Court for Cowlitz County following a trial in which the trial court refused to grant Harvill’s request to instruct the jury regarding an affirmative defense of duress, ruling that such an instruction would be improper as no explicit threats had been made against Harvill coercing him to deliver cocaine. Harvill appealed his conviction, asserting that he had presented sufficient evidence of a perceived implicit threat to support a duress defense. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Harvill’s conviction. Harvill appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s): Did the trial court err in refusing Harvill’s request for a duress instruction to the jury on grounds that no explicit threat had been made against Harvill?

Conclusion: Justice Stephens’ opinion for a unanimous Court concluded that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury regarding the affirmative defense of duress as an explicit threat is not required to establish duress. As Harvill had presented sufficient evidence of fear stemming from implicit threats against him, the Court held that the jury should therefore have had the opportunity to determine if that fear was reasonable and remanded the case to the trial court.

Docket No. 82358-8 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 35821-2)

Petitioner: Joshua Harvill

(Counsel: Valerie Marushige)

Respondent: State of Washington

(Counsel: Michelle L. Shaffer and Sean M. Brittain)

Briefs:

Argument: Thursday, January 14, 2010 2:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, July 22nd, 2010

Prevailing Party: Joshua Harvill (Petitioner)

Vote: 9-0

Citation: Pending

Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-)

Madsen

Johnson

Alexander

Sanders

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens
(Majority)