State v. Gladstone

Facts

Douglas Thompson, a 25-year-old student, worked as an informant for the Tacoma Police Department's narcotics detail. Two officers asked him to try to buy marijuana from Gladstone. On the evening of April 10, 1967, Thompson went alone to Gladstone's apartment door and asked to buy marijuana. By Thompson's account, Gladstone said he did not have enough on hand to sell, but he knew someone who had plenty and was willing to sell. He named that person as Robert Kent. When Thompson asked, Gladstone drew a crude map of 8 penciled lines showing where Kent lived. The officers drove Thompson to Kent's residence, where Thompson bought about 8 ounces of marijuana from Kent. Kent was later arrested and convicted of that sale. Gladstone testified that he had seen Kent between classes, had been with him perhaps 10 times, and had once given him a ride home. He said he did not know Kent used marijuana or kept it for sale. In his version, Thompson asked him to sell and he said no. Thompson then asked whether he knew Kent and where Kent lived. Gladstone said he could direct him there and drew a map when asked. The State offered no evidence of any communication, arrangement or understanding between Gladstone and Kent.

Issues

1. Does a person aid and abet another's sale of marijuana by telling an undercover buyer that the other might sell it and drawing a map to his home, when nothing shows any link between the two?
2. What must the State prove to show that a defendant aided and abetted a crime under RCW 9.01.030, apart from proving a conspiracy?

Holding

Gladstone's naming of Kent as a possible seller and his map to Kent's home, with no evidence of any connection or communication between Gladstone and Kent, did not prove aiding and abetting Kent's sale. The evidence was insufficient as a matter of law.