Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Bajardi

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1

May 16, 2018

STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent,
v.
NICHOLAS P. BAJARDI, Appellant.

          ORDER FILE DATE May 25, 2018

         ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PUBLISH OPINION

         Appellant filed a motion to publish the court's April 16, 2018 opinion. Respondent has filed a response expressing no objection to the motion. Following consideration of the motion, the panel has determined the motion should be granted. Now, therefore, it is hereby

         ORDERED that appellant's motion to publish Is granted.

          VERELLEN, J

         The State charged Nicholas Bajardi with violation of a no contact order against Erin Roblin. The Thurston County Superior Court admitted a certified copy of Roblin's driver's license as a self-authenticating business or public record. Because the driver's license contains facts, not conclusions involving the exercise of judgment or discretion or expression of opinion, and the State presented the required documentation to prove the license's authenticity, the trial court did not abuse its discretion.

         Additionally, Bajardi challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for violating a no contact order. But viewed in a light most favorable to the State, there was sufficient evidence that there was a valid no contact order prohibiting him from having contact with Roblin, he knowingly contacted her, and at the time of contact with Robiin, he had twice been convicted of violating a no contact order.

         The trial court found Bajardi indigent. Because nothing in this record overcomes this presumption, we decline to award the State costs.

         Therefore, we affirm.

         FACTS

         The Thurston County Superior Court issued a no contact order against Nicholas Bajardi, protecting Erin Robiin, in November 2014. Bajardi had previously been convicted of violating a no contact order.

         On November 2, 2016, Officers Lett and Rodriguez were called to a wooded area on report of a suspicious vehicle that might have been trespassing. When the officers arrived, they heard both a male voice and a female voice. The officers walked towards the vehicle, approaching it from different angles. While Officer Rodriguez spoke with Bajardi, Officer Lett stopped and talked to the woman in the van. Both officers testified that the woman in the photograph on Robiin's driver's license was the same woman they contacted on November 2, 2016.

         After speaking with Robiin, the officers detained Bajardi for further investigation. After being handcuffed, Bajardi told officers, "I wasn't talking to her."[1] Officer Rodriguez confirmed that Bajardi had a Department of Corrections warrant for escaping community custody.

         The trial court admitted the driver's license over Bajardi's objection. After a bench trial, Bajardi was found guilty of felony violation of a no contact order. Bajardi appeals.

         ANALYSIS

          /. Driver's License Admission

         Bajardi contends the trial court abused its discretion by admitting a certified copy of Roblin's driver's license into evidence.

         We review a trial court's evidentiary decisions for abuse of discretion.[2]The trial court's "decision to admit or exclude business records is given great weight and will not be reversed unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion."[3] "'Discretion is abused if it is exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons.'"[4]

         Relevant evidence is "evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."[5] The trial court "has wide discretion in balancing the probative value of the evidence against its potentially prejudicial impact."[6]

         In State v. Mares. Mares appealed his conviction for violating a no contact order against Brittany Knopff.[7] The State introduced a copy of Knopff s driver" license to prove she was the person named in the order.[8] This court concluded the license was admissible as a public record, "and the custodian who ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.