# State v. Thomas

> Washington Supreme Court · January 29, 2004 · 150 Wash. 2d 821

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4712886

## Case

- **Full name:** The State of Washington v. Covell Paul Thomas
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** January 29, 2004
- **Citations:** 150 Wash. 2d 821
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Chambers
- **Judges:** Alexander, Bridge, Chambers, Fairhurst, Ireland, Johnson, Madsen, Owens, Sanders
- **Cited by:** 961 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4712886

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the appellate court “must defer to the trier of fact on issues of conflicting testimony, credibility of witnesses, and the persuasiveness of the evidence”
- finding a startling event occurred based on the circumstantial evidence of the declarant being described as “ visibly shaken” and scared
- stating that polygraph tests are unreliable

## Opinion text

Chambers, J.
(concurring) — I concur with the result reached by the majority on the grounds that, under Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137, 158 , 107 S. Ct. 1676 , 95 L. Ed. 2d 127 (1987), the State bears the burden of proving Covell Thomas was a major participant in the crime before the death penalty may be imposed. See also State v. Roberts, 142 Wn.2d 471, 503-04 , 14 P.3d 713 (2000). Instructional error relieved the State of this burden, and therefore, the death penalty must be vacated. However, instructional error in a “to convict” instruction may be harmless. See State v. Brown, 147 Wn.2d 330, 338-39 , 58 P.3d 889 (2002). I concur *877 with the majority that under the facts of this case, that error was harmless, and join in affirming Thomas’s first degree murder conviction.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4712886. Public record. Not legal advice.