Opinion
No. 54061-1-I
Filed: April 4, 2005 UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No. 03-1-07787-5. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 04/05/2004. Judge signing: Hon. Steven Scott.
Counsel for Appellant(s), Nielsen Broman Koch Pllc, Attorney at Law, 1908 E Madison St, Seattle, WA 98122.
Jennifer L. Dobson, Nielsen Broman Koch PLLC, 1908 E Madison St, Seattle, WA 98122-2842.
Michael Howard Walker (Appearing Pro Se), Doc# 914935, Wa State Penitentiary, 1313 N. 13th Ave., Walla Walla, WA 99362.
Counsel for Respondent(s), Prosecuting Atty King County, King Co Pros/App Unit Supervisor, W554 King County Courthouse, 516 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104.
Patrick Joseph Preston, King County Prosecutor's Office, 516 3rd Ave Ste W554, Seattle, WA 98104-2362.
A jury convicted Michael Walker of two counts of assault in the first degree. He contends that the trial court erred in requiring him to provide a biological sample for DNA identification. Walker has also filed a statement listing several additional grounds he believes should be addressed. We affirm.
Walker and his first victim knew each other. On July 25, 2003, Walker and the victim were in the park near the King County courthouse. According to the victim, Walker became angry when he came to believe she was interfering with his drug business. Walker approached her from behind and slashed her face and arm with a knife. Walker then fled on foot. A witness who observed the event identified Walker as the assailant. This witness and his friend followed Walker and tried to get others to call the police. Two other men, one of whom became the second victim, joined these two in attempting to make sure Walker did not escape. As the men attempted to block Walker's flight, he stabbed one of them in the stomach. The police arrived and arrested Walker shortly thereafter.
The State charged Walker with two counts of first degree assault, while armed with a deadly weapon. Several witnesses testified concerning the attacks and identified Walker as the assailant. Walker testified that the first victim and her friends robbed him and that she got cut when he took a knife from her after her friends left. He testified that the second victim came at him with a knife and got stabbed as Walker tried to defend himself. A jury returned guilty verdicts on both counts. As part of Walker's sentence, the trial court required that he provide a biological sample. Walker's counsel contends that the order requiring a biological sample violates Walker's Fourth Amendment rights and his rights under Article 1, sec. 7 of the Washington State Constitution. We reject these arguments for the reasons set out in State v. Surge, and the cases cited therein.
Walker relies in part on United States v. Miles, 228 F. Supp. 2d 1130 (E.D. Cal. 2002). But Miles appears to have been rejected by other federal courts. See, e.g., U.S. v. Kincade, 379 F.3d 813 (9th Cir. 2004); U.S. v. Kimler, 335 F.3d 1132 (10th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1083, 124 S. Ct. 945, 157 L. Ed. 2d 759 (2003), Vore v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 281 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (D. Ariz. 2003); Miller v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 259 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (D. Kan. 2003).
122 Wn. App. 448, 94 P.3d 345 (2004).
Pro se, Walker lists the following additional grounds for review, malicious prosecution, denial of equal protection, ineffective assistance of counsel, denial of a fair and impartial trial, the imposition of excessive bail, and denial of his right to a jury trial.
Walker does no more than list these as grounds. As to the first four, merely listing them is not sufficient to inform the court of the nature and occurrence of the alleged errors, RAP 10.10(c), and we therefore decline to address them. The bail claim is similarly lacking but it also seems to be moot, as Walker has been convicted. We do not understand the reference to denial of the right to jury trial as Walker was convicted by a jury.
Affirmed.
APPELWICK, ELLINGTON and AGID, JJ.