CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT

SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 6933



60th Legislature
2008 Regular Session

Passed by the Senate March 10, 2008
  YEAS 47   NAYS 0


________________________________________    
President of the Senate
Passed by the House March 5, 2008
  YEAS 91   NAYS 5


________________________________________    
Speaker of the House of Representatives


CERTIFICATE

I, Thomas Hoemann, Secretary of the Senate of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 6933 as passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on the dates hereon set forth.


________________________________________    
Secretary
Approved 









________________________________________    
Governor of the State of Washington
FILED







Secretary of State
State of Washington


_____________________________________________ 

SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 6933
_____________________________________________

AS AMENDED BY THE HOUSE

Passed Legislature - 2008 Regular Session
State of Washington60th Legislature2008 Regular Session

By Senate Judiciary (originally sponsored by Senators Marr, Hargrove, Hewitt, Franklin, Pflug, Carrell, Berkey, Kauffman, Haugen, McCaslin, Rockefeller, Fraser, and Kilmer)

READ FIRST TIME 02/08/08.   



     AN ACT Relating to admissibility of evidence in sex offense cases; adding a new section to chapter 10.58 RCW; and creating new sections.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 1   In Washington, the legislature and the courts share the responsibility for enacting rules of evidence. The court's authority for enacting rules of evidence arises from a statutory delegation of that responsibility to the court and from Article IV, section 1 of the state Constitution. State v. Fields, 85 Wn.2d 126, 129, 530 P.2d 284 (1975).
     The legislature's authority for enacting rules of evidence arises from the Washington supreme court's prior classification of such rules as substantive law. See State v. Sears, 4 Wn.2d 200, 215, 103 P.2d 337 (1940) (the legislature has the power to enact laws which create rules of evidence); State v. Pavelich, 153 Wash. 379, 279 P. 1102 (1929) ("rules of evidence are substantiative law").
     The legislature adopts this exception to Evidence Rule 404(b) to ensure that juries receive the necessary evidence to reach a just and fair verdict.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 2   A new section is added to chapter 10.58 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) In a criminal action in which the defendant is accused of a sex offense, evidence of the defendant's commission of another sex offense or sex offenses is admissible, notwithstanding Evidence Rule 404(b), if the evidence is not inadmissible pursuant to Evidence Rule 403.
     (2) In a case in which the state intends to offer evidence under this rule, the attorney for the state shall disclose the evidence to the defendant, including statements of witnesses or a summary of the substance of any testimony that is expected to be offered, at least fifteen days before the scheduled date of trial or at such later time as the court may allow for good cause.
     (3) This section shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other evidence rule.
     (4) For purposes of this section, "sex offense" means:
     (a) Any offense defined as a sex offense by RCW 9.94A.030;
     (b) Any violation under RCW 9A.44.096 (sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree); and
     (c) Any violation under RCW 9.68A.090 (communication with a minor for immoral purposes).
     (5) For purposes of this section, uncharged conduct is included in the definition of "sex offense."
     (6) When evaluating whether evidence of the defendant's commission of another sexual offense or offenses should be excluded pursuant to Evidence Rule 403, the trial judge shall consider the following factors:
     (a) The similarity of the prior acts to the acts charged;
     (b) The closeness in time of the prior acts to the acts charged;
     (c) The frequency of the prior acts;
     (d) The presence or lack of intervening circumstances;
     (e) The necessity of the evidence beyond the testimonies already offered at trial;
     (f) Whether the prior act was a criminal conviction;
     (g) Whether the probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence; and
     (h) Other facts and circumstances.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 3   Section 2 of this act applies to any case that is tried on or after its adoption.

--- END ---