Opinion
No. 21583-1-III.
Filed: February 17, 2004. UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from Superior Court of Grant County. Docket No: 02-1-00553-8. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 11/12/2002. Judge signing: Hon. Evan E Sperline.
Counsel for Appellant(s), Damian Todd Martinez (Appearing Pro Se), 6738 Rd. U.S.E., Warden, WA 98857.
Robert E. Schiffner, Attorney at Law, PO Box 776, Moses Lake, WA 98837-0117.
Counsel for Respondent(s), Albert H Lin, Grant County Prosecutors Office, Law Justice Center, PO Box 37, Ephrata, WA 98823-0037.
Attempting to elude a police officer requires among other things a showing of willful or wanton disregard for others. State v. Stayton, 39 Wn. App. 46, 49, 691 P.2d 596 (1984). Damian Martinez challenges the sufficiency of the evidence at his trial to support that element. But the State's showing at trial was that he drove at twice the speed limit and endangered both people and property. So the evidence easily supports the willful or wanton element of eluding.
FACTS
On a clear and sunny afternoon in early August 2002, Warden Police Officer Jaime Lamb was in uniform driving his clearly marked squad car. He saw Damian Martinez driving through town. Officer Lamb knew Mr. Martinez from prior contacts. And he knew that Mr. Martinez had warrants out for his arrest. Officer Lamb confirmed the warrants. He caught up with Mr. Martinez at the post office. He saw Mr. Martinez leaving the post office. Officer Lamb motioned for Mr. Martinez to come over. Instead Mr. Martinez got into his car and drove off. Officer Lamb activated his emergency lights and siren and pursued him. Mr. Martinez did not stop.
Officer Lamb chased Mr. Martinez for about a mile over dirt and paved roads at speeds between 40 and 50 miles per hour. The speed limit was 20 or 25 miles per hour on these roads. Mr. Martinez eventually drove between two potato sheds and skidded to a stop in a parking lot at his mother's house where there were several parked cars and people were outside eating. The State charged Mr. Martinez with attempting to elude a pursing police vehicle. The judge found him guilty after a bench trial. The trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law.
DISCUSSION
Our review is limited to whether substantial evidence supports the challenged findings, and whether the findings support the trial court's conclusions of law. State v. Alvarez, 105 Wn. App. 215, 220, 19 P.3d 485 (2001). We evaluate the facts by deciding whether any rational fact finder could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. DeVries, 149 Wn.2d 842, 849, 72 P.3d 748 (2003) (citing State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192, 201, 829 P.2d 1068 (1992)). We review de novo the trial court's legal conclusions. State v. Collins, 121 Wn.2d 168, 174, 847 P.2d 919 (1993).
Mr. Martinez does not challenge any of the court's findings of fact. They are then verities on appeal. State v. Pauling, 149 Wn.2d 381, 391, 69 P.3d 331, cert. denied, 124 S.Ct. 470 (2003).
The statute requires `a wanton or wilful disregard for the lives or property of others while attempting to elude a pursuing police vehicle.' Former RCW 46.61.024 (1983) (emphasis added).
Taken together, the terms `willful' or ``wanton' usually mean "that the actor has intentionally done an act of an unreasonable character in disregard of a known or obvious risk that was so great as to make it highly probable that harm would follow, and which thus is usually accompanied by a conscious indifference to the consequences." State v. Brown, 40 Wn. App. 91, 96, 697 P.2d 583 (1985) (quoting W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts sec. 34, at 213 (5th ed. 1984)). `[W]anton [or] willful disregard for the lives or property of others' includes both a subjective and objective component. State v. Sherman, 98 Wn.2d 53, 57-58, 653 P.2d 612 (1982).
Mr. Martinez argues that his driving did not objectively show a willful or wanton disregard for others. Citing State v. Tarica, he argues that eluding requires the State to prove that the driver committed more than a traffic infraction while attempting to avoid arrest. State v. Tarica, 59 Wn. App. 368, 375, 798 P.2d 296 (1990), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322, 899 P.2d 1251 (1995). In Tarica, the court concluded that a Terry stop was not justified on the basis of suspicion of attempting to elude where the driver's speed was five miles per hour over the limit and that he straddled both lanes on a downtown street. Tarica, 59 Wn. App. at 375-76. The court did determine that a stop was justified by the traffic infractions. Id. at 376.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968).
Mr. Martinez's speeds here were at times twice the legal limit. See State v. Malone, 106 Wn.2d 607, 611, 724 P.2d 364 (1986) (noting that legislature enacted the eluding statute to address the dangers of high-speed chases). And these high speeds were on dirt roads. The officer's vehicle fishtailed. Mr. Martinez maneuvered between potato sheds and skidded into a parking lot occupied by cars and folks eating a meal.
`Wanton or willful does not require `that the defendant's driving endangered anyone else, or that a high probability of harm actually existed. Instead, the evidence need only establish that the defendant engaged in conduct from which a [trier of fact] could infer wanton or willful disregard for the lives or property of others.'' State v. Treat, 109 Wn. App. 419, 427, 35 P.3d 1192 (2001) (quoting State v. Refuerzo, 102 Wn. App. 341, 348-49, 7 P.3d 847 (2000)). A rational fact finder could determine that Mr. Martinez's driving was unreasonable and showed indifference or disregard for the risk his driving posed or its consequences.
The trial judge could easily find that Mr. Martinez drove his car in wanton or willful disregard for the lives or property of others.
We affirm the conviction.
A majority of the panel has determined that this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports but it will be filed for public record pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
KATO, A.C.J., SCHULTHEIS, J., concur.