City of Bothell v. Barnhart, No. 84907-2. James Barnhart was convicted by jury in the Bothell Municipal Court of stalking. The Superior Court affirmed the conviction. Bothell is one of a few cities in the state that is located in two counties—both King and Snohomish Counties. Barnhart was charged in Snohomish but two jurors from King County sat on the panel. The Court of Appeals held that the Washington Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 22) requires that a defendant be tried by a jury of the county where alleged offense was committed. The court held that Barnhart’s jury trial right was violated, reversed the conviction, and remanded for a new trial.The State Supreme Court granted review. The City of Bothell argues that the true community in which Banhart committed his crime was the City of Bothell, regardless of county lines that divide the city. The trial court is run by the City as a whole, and often hears cases originating from crimes in both Sno and King counties. Conceptually, there is some support for the city's argument that local means municipal in 6th Amendment jurisprudence.
Barnhart's argument is that the jury was not constitutionally impaneled because two members resided in King County, relying on the plain reading of § 21 & 22 of the Washington state's constitution. § 21 explicitly defines community as having to do with a county. The principle that juries must represent the local population is well-agreed upon. The question lies in choosing the correct set arbitrary political lines that define community.
