McClure appeals his conviction of first degree extortion.
McClure threatened to cause further damage to Robert
Williams' property if Williams did not provide him with a
letter stating that Williams would not allow charges to be
placed against McClure or his wife for damage McClure had
caused to that property.
argues that the State failed to provide sufficient evidence
that he attempted to obtain property or services from his
victim, Williams, which is a statutory element of extortion
under RCW 9A.56.110. We hold that the evidence was sufficient
to support a finding that McClure attempted to obtain
valuable intangible property - a promise from Williams that
he would not pursue criminal charges or a civil remedy
against McClure for the damaged property, which would
eliminate Williams' ability to obtain compensation for
that damage. Accordingly, we affirm McClure's conviction.
2013, Williams and McClure entered into an agreement under
which McClure would reside in a double wide trailer Williams
owned that needed repairs. McClure would perform the repairs.
In return, he would live in the trailer rent free for one
year and then he would start paying rent. After a year,
Williams contacted McClure and told him that if he did not
pay rent, Williams would evict him. McClure responded by
threatening to destroy the trailer if Williams evicted him.
did not pay his rent and Williams began the eviction process.
Williams visited the trailer on the day McClure was to be
evicted and discovered that the sliding glass door, the front
door, the kitchen cabinets, and the wood stove had been
removed. In addition, pipes were ripped out of the ceiling
and electrical lines had been cut. Williams contacted the
days later, Williams returned to the trailer and observed
people on the property who were removing siding, electrical
wire, plumbing, appliances, and fixtures from the trailer and
portions of his shed. A deputy sheriff informed Williams that
someone had taken out a Craigslist ad inviting people onto
the property to take what they wanted.
sent a text message to McClure asking him to remove the ad.
McClure texted a response: "I will pull the ads if you
take a letter . . . signed and notarized by both you and Lisa
[Williams' wife] that will not allow any c[h]arges to be
placed against me or my wife for anything related to the
property. I don't need the hassle. I will also not have
the signs placed that I made for the same purpose."
Report of Proceedings (RP) at 80. After Williams again asked
McClure to remove the ad, McClure texted, "A simple
letter will take you 15 minutes and it will be done." RP
State charged McClure with first degree extortion and first
degree malicious mischief. A jury convicted him of both
charges. McClure appeals only his first degree extortion
Sufficiency of the Evidence
Standard of Review
test for determining sufficiency of the evidence is whether,
after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
State, any rational trier of fact could have found guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Homan, 181 Wn.2d
102, 105, 330 P.3d 182 (2014). In a sufficiency of the
evidence claim, the defendant admits the truth of the
State's evidence and all reasonable inferences drawn from
that evidence. Id. at 106. Credibility
determinations are made by the trier of fact and are not