IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
DIVISION ONE
Respondent,
No. 71722-7-1
v.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
CLARENCE JONES,
Appellant. FILED: December 29, 2014
Per Curiam — Clarence Jones appeals from the judgment and sentence
entered after a jury found him guilty of assault in the second degree and unlawful
possession of a firearm in the first degree. He contends - and the State
concedes - that the judgment and sentence inadvertently states the incorrect
date for the assault charge. We accept the State's concession and remand for
correction of the scrivener's error.
In his statement of additional ground for review, Jones alleges that both
defense counsel and the police failed to adequately investigate potential
witnesses. But Jones does not identify the alleged witnesses or their potential
testimony. Moreover, because Jones's allegations rest on matters outside of the
record, they cannot be considered on direct appeal. See State v. McFarland,
127 Wn.2d 322, 337-38, 899 P.2d 1251 (1995).
Jones next contends that the trial court erred in limiting the testimony of a
State eyewitness. But he does not sufficiently identify the nature of the
No. 71722-7-1/2
improperly excluded evidence or establish any resulting prejudice. Under the
circumstances, he has failed "to inform the court of the nature and occurrence" of
the alleged error. RAP 10.10(c).
Jones also contends that instruction 18, the "to convict" instruction for
unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree, failed to include all of the
necessary elements of the offense. But Instruction 18 followed WPIC 133.02.
And Jones fails to identify the alleged missing elements or otherwise explain why
the instruction was deficient. His challenge therefore fails.
Finally, Jones contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his
conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree. But his
arguments rest on the claim that the State's witnesses were not credible. This
court cannot review the credibility of witnesses on appeal. See State v. Walton,
64 Wn. App. 410, 415-16, 824 P.2d 533 (1992) (appellate court defers to the trier
of fact on issues of conflicting testimony, credibility of witnesses, and the
persuasiveness of the evidence).
We affirm Jones's conviction. We remand solely to permit the trial court to
correct the scrivener's error on the judgment and sentence.
FOR THE COURT:
CO
CD
LrJ
CD
era
-2-