"Requiring a nexus between the defendant, the crime, and the weapon protects against violation of the right to bear arms."
How later courts described this case
- "Requiring a nexus between the defendant, the crime, and the weapon protects against violation of the right to bear arms."
- noting the deadly weapon statute is directed at more than the protection of the police, the legislature also intended to deter armed crime and to protect victims from armed crime
- defendant armed where police found him at the bottom of stairs 6 to 10 feet away from loaded revolver in a holster hanging on a nail
- rejecting the argument that the State must prove that the defendant was armed at the time of arrest
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Chambers, J.
(concurring in dissent) — I concur with Justice Sanders that article I, section 24 of the Washington *602 Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. Simple constructive possession of a weapon on the premises sometime during the entire period of illegal activity is not enough to establish a nexus between the crime and the weapon. Without that nexus, we run the risk of convicting a defendant under the deadly weapon enhancement for having a weapon unrelated to the crime. See Judge Agid’s excellent analysis in State v. Johnson, 94 Wn. App. 882, 892-97 , 974 P.2d 855 (1999).