Appeals court reverses burglary conviction

SPOKANE — A Moses Lake man will be getting a new trial due to the Washington Court of Appeals, Division III, reversing his second-degree burglary conviction.

Patrick Garcia was arrested in the early morning hours of June 8, 2015 after a barking dog alerted a woman to the presence of a male, Garcia, on her property. The woman reported witnessing Garcia empty the contents of a small wastebasket, which was in the woman’s camper trailer, into a garbage can.

Garcia was found by police in a nearby trailer park and he was found to be in possession of toiletry items and two large knives, with additional items found in his pockets. Garcia denied going into the trailer and could not explain why he was in possession of a wastebasket from the trailer. Prosecutors charged Garcia with one count of residential burglary, with an alternative charge of second-degree burglary, both of which included deadly weapon allegations, and third-degree theft.

The prosecution’s theory of the case was that Garcia committed residential burglary of the camper trailer on the basis that it was a “dwelling,” due the owners using it on a past camping trip. The case was handed off to the jury and jurors were given standard instructions that laid out the elements of the two burglary counts.

“During deliberations, the jury sent out a question: ‘Instruction 14, what is the definition of ‘any fenced area’?’ The court discussed the question with counsel, with the prosecutor pointing out that he was not relying on the fenced area theory of ‘building’ and defense counsel suggested that the best response was simply to refer the jury back to the instructions,” wrote Judge Kevin Korsmo. “The court agreed and directed the jury to review its instructions.”

The jury returned a verdict of not guilty to residential burglary and guilty to second-degree burglary and third-degree theft. A 22-month prison sentence was handed down and Garcia appealed. Both Garcia and the state agreed the burglary count should be reversed because of the jury possibly relying on a burglary theory that was not in evidence.

“Here, the parties agree that the (victim’s) property is only partially fenced. They also agree that the jury’s inquiry concerning the meaning of ‘fenced area’ suggested that some members of the jury may have believed that a burglary was committed other than by entering the camper trailer,” Korsmo wrote. “In such a circumstance, Mr. Garcia correctly argues that jurors may have returned a verdict on a multiple acts case without agreeing on the same action.”

The two parties disagreed on whether a new trial was needed. The appeals court judges found Garcia’s speculation that some jurors voted for a conviction based on a legally insufficient theory ultimately fails and it was not proof that the verdict was based on an “insufficient basis.” The judges ultimately reversed the second-degree burglary conviction and ordered a new trial on that charge only.

In their decision the judges also briefly addressed Garcia’s claim the court made a mistake when it authorized testimony from police. The testimony was regarding police efforts to corroborate Garcia’s explanation of why he was in the neighborhood where the incident took place. The decision states the court did not err in its handling of the matter and the court can reconsider the issue at Garcia's next trial.

Richard Byrd can be reached via email at city@columbiabasinherald.com.