Filed Washington State Court of Appeals Division Two January 8, 2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 50622-0-II Respondent, v. JOSHUA EARL HARRIS, UNPUBLISHED OPINION Appellant. WORSWICK, J. — Joshua Earl Harris appeals his convictions for communication with a minor for immoral purposes, third degree attempted rape of a child, and possession of a controlled substance. Harris argues that there was insufficient evidence to show he had the specific intent to rape a child or that he took a substantial step toward raping a child, and that his due process rights were violated when law enforcement did not follow the Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Standards and engaged in outrageous conduct. Further, Harris argues that the court imposed impermissible legal financial obligations (LFOs). We hold that sufficient evidence supports Harris’s convictions, that his due process rights were not violated, and that the court did not impermissibly impose LFOs. Thus, we affirm. FACTS The ICAC Task Force Program is part of a congressional directive to the Attorney General of the United States to implement a national strategy for child exploitation prevention and interdiction. 34 U.S.C. §§ 21111-21112. As directed by Congress, the Department of Justice created the ICAC Operational and Investigative Standards to provide procedural and No. 50622-0-II investigatory standards for these investigations. The ICAC Task Force Program includes state and local law enforcement task forces to combat Internet crimes against children. 34 U.S.C. § 21113. One of these task forces is the Washington State ICAC Task Force. The Washington State ICAC Task Force has an interagency agreement with the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) in which VPD agrees to adhere to the ICAC Standards. Regarding Harris’s case, Detective Robert Givens of the VPD placed an advertisement in the Casual Encounters section on Craigslist. The ad read, “[S]kipping school today want to chat W4M Vancouver. I’m just a girl ditching today from school. You want to chat with me? I’m pretty mellow. Send me a message. I’ll be around gaming and chatting.[♥]” 3 Verbatim Report of Proceedings (VRP) at 362. W4M meant a woman looking for a male. Harris, a 36-year-old man, responded to the ad. Detective Givens replied posing as “Julie Vincent,”1 a nonexistent 14-year-old girl created for this investigation. 3 VRP at 366. Harris said, “I am 36, which I hope is not a deal breaker.” 3 VRP at 367. Julie replied, “I’m 14. I’m okay if you’re okay.” 3 VRP at 367. Harris responded, “I suppose it is. I just wanted to chat anyway.” 3 VRP at 367. Harris stated that by skipping school, he thought Julie was referring to college and requested they “keep it civil.” 3 VRP at 367. After chatting about video games, Harris asked Julie to send him a photograph. Craigslist blocked Julie’s attempt to send a photograph, but Julie began chatting with Harris directly the following morning. Julie then sent a photograph to Harris. This photograph was of a female police officer who was ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals