TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Cover Page
2. Table of Authorities
3. Assignments of Error
4. Statement of the Case
5. Statement of Facts
6. Argument
7. Conclusion
8. Certificate of Compliance
9. Certificate of Service

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION [I / II / III]

BRIEF OF APPELLANT

Attorney for Appellant:

[________________________________]
[________________________________] (WSBA No. [________________________________])
[________________________________]
[________________________________], Washington [________________________________]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Statutes

Rules

I. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

1. The trial court erred in [________________________________].

2. The evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for [________________________________].

3. [________________________________]

Issues Pertaining to Assignments of Error:

1. Whether [________________________________].

2. Whether [________________________________].

3. [________________________________]

II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On or about [__/__/____], an ☐ Information / ☐ Indictment was filed in [________________________________] County Superior Court charging Appellant with:

[Summarize pretrial proceedings, motions, and rulings.]

[________________________________]

On [__/__/____], the case proceeded to ☐ jury trial / ☐ bench trial / ☐ Appellant entered a plea of ☐ guilty / ☐ Alford plea.

On [__/__/____], the ☐ jury returned a verdict of / ☐ court found:

[________________________________]

On [__/__/____], the superior court sentenced Appellant to:

[________________________________]

(CP [____]; RP [____].)

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on [__/__/____]. (CP [____].)

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. State's Case

[________________________________]

(RP [____].)

B. Defense Case

[________________________________]

(RP [____].)

C. Rebuttal (if any)

[________________________________]

(RP [____].)

IV. ARGUMENT

A. [ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NO. 1 HEADING]

[________________________________]

1. Standard of Review

☐ De novo review applies to questions of law, including constitutional issues and statutory interpretation. (State v. Squally, 132 Wn.2d 333 (1997).)

☐ Abuse of discretion applies to discretionary rulings, including evidentiary decisions. A trial court abuses its discretion when it exercises it on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons. (State v. Stenson, 132 Wn.2d 668 (1997).)

☐ Sufficiency of the evidence — the court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and determines whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt. (State v. Green, 94 Wn.2d 216 (1980); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979).)

☐ Manifest error affecting a constitutional right — under RAP 2.5(a)(3), the appellant may raise for the first time on appeal a manifest error affecting a constitutional right. (State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322 (1995).)

[________________________________]

2. Applicable Legal Principles

[________________________________]

3. Analysis

[________________________________]

4. Prejudice / Harmless Error

☐ Under Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967), the constitutional error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because [________________________________].

☐ Under Washington's non-constitutional harmless-error standard, the error is not harmless unless it is trivial, formal, or academic, and does not affect the outcome. (State v. Bourgeois, 133 Wn.2d 389 (1997).)

[________________________________]

B. [ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NO. 2 HEADING]

[________________________________]

1. Standard of Review

[________________________________]

2. Applicable Legal Principles

[________________________________]

3. Analysis

[________________________________]

4. Prejudice / Harmless Error

[________________________________]

C. [ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENTS AS NEEDED]

[________________________________]

V. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Appellant respectfully requests that this Court:

☐ Reverse the judgment and sentence.
☐ Reverse and remand for a new trial.
☐ Modify the judgment as follows: [________________________________].
☐ Vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.
☐ [________________________________]

Respectfully submitted,

Date: [__/__/____]

_________________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
Attorney for Appellant

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to RAP 18.17, I certify that this brief complies with the word limitation and contains [________________________________] words, exclusive of the title sheet, table of contents, and table of authorities, as counted by [________________________________] word-processing program. This brief does not exceed the 12,000-word limit.

Date: [__/__/____]

_________________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, [________________________________], certify that on [__/__/____], I served the foregoing Brief of Appellant on the following parties by the method indicated:

☐ U.S. Mail, first-class, postage prepaid
☐ Electronic service via the Washington State Appellate Courts portal
☐ Hand delivery

Date: [__/__/____]

_________________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]

STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES FOR WASHINGTON

1. Three Divisions: The Court of Appeals has three divisions — Division I (Seattle), Division II (Tacoma), and Division III (Spokane). File in the division covering the county of origin.

2. Word Limit: Briefs of appellants, petitioners, and respondents limited to 12,000 words; reply briefs 6,000 words. (RAP 18.17.)

3. Formatting: 2-inch left margin, 1.5-inch right, top, and bottom margins. Double-spaced, 12-point or larger type. (RAP 18.17.)

4. Notice of Appeal: Must be filed within 30 days after entry of the judgment and sentence. (RAP 5.2(a).)

5. RAP 2.5(a)(3) — Manifest Error: Washington allows appellants to raise for the first time on appeal a manifest error affecting a constitutional right. (State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322 (1995).)

6. Statement of Additional Grounds (SAG): Under RAP 10.10, a defendant may file a pro se statement of additional grounds for review within 30 days of being notified of the right.

7. Petition for Review: After the Court of Appeals decision, a party may petition for review by the Supreme Court within 30 days. (RAP 13.4.)

8. Personal Restraint Petition (PRP): Separate from direct appeal, a PRP may be filed under RAP 16.4 for collateral review.