![]() When the officer did not find a warrant, he released Watkins. When the officer could not find the name in the system, he told Watkins to provide to him his correct name Watkins admitted he had given a false name and said he thought that there was a warrant for his arrest. Watkins told the officer that he was just reorganizing his “truck and canopy” and gave the officer a false name and date of birth. When the officer arrived, he saw a “little truck with a canopy jammed full of property and then property kind of all about the parking lot.” 1 Report of Proceedings (RP) at 138. On June 22, 2015, Portland Police Officer John Maul, Jr., contacted Watkins in a restaurant parking lot after a report of some suspicious activity. ![]() BACKGROUND Watkins has prior convictions for sex offenses and has been required to register as a sex offender for several years. 48180-4-II the amended information was constitutionally adequate and the evidence was sufficient to support both convictions, we affirm. ![]() Because this amendment, which added references to prior convictions “pursuant to federal law” and a new section criminalizing a refusal to provide deoxyribonucleic acid, does not affect our analysis, we cite to the current version of the statute. The legislature amended RCW 9A.44.132 in 2015. In his statement of additional grounds3 (SAG), he reiterates his counsel’s sufficiency challenge and contends that the evidence was also insufficient to prove the failure to register offense. ![]() Malachi Mark Watkins appeals his bench trial convictions for failure to register as a sex offender with one prior offense1 and tampering with a witness.2 He argues that the amended information failed to allege all of the essential elements of the failure to register charge and that there was insufficient evidence of the tampering with a witness charge. MALACHI MARK WATKINS, UNPUBLISHED OPINION Appellant. Filed Washington State Court of Appeals Division Two FebruIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II STATE OF WASHINGTON, No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |