In State v. Floe, No. 59948-1-II (July 29, 2025), the WA Court of Appeals held that a defendant who gave his sister a gun and persuaded her to shoot him at work so he could file an L&I claim can be held criminally liable for Conspiracy to Commit Assault  Second Degree and Conspiracy to Commit Drive-By Shooting.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On October 7, 2021, someone shot Mr. Floe outside of the Shelton Department of Corrections (DOC) office. At the time, DOC employed Floe. That same day, he signed a Department of Labor and Industries Report of Accident affirming his gunshot wound occurred on the job.

Police interviewed Floe at the hospital. He told the officers that the morning had begun with a workout at a gym. When Floe arrived at work following his workout, his sister, Ms. Harris, brought him breakfast and then drove away. Floe reported that after Ms. Harris left, he was shot. Floe told the interviewing officers that he did not know who shot him. He described the individual as wearing a hoodie and having a “male gait.”

Following their interviews with Floe and Harris, police continued to investigate the shooting. Surveillance footage and neighborhood interviews led officers to believe that Harris’ SUV was still present on scene at the time Floe was shot contrary to his prior statements. Police also deployed a tracking dog but found no trace of the male individual described by Floe as running from the scene.

After more interviews with police, Floe admitted that he convinced his sister to shoot him. The State subsequently charged Floe with Second Degree Assault, Conspiracy to Commit Second Degree Assault, Drive-By Shooting, Conspiracy to Commit Drive-By Shooting, False Reporting and Forgery.

Floe filed and argued pre-trial motions to dismiss. However, the trial court rejected Floe’s arguments. At a bench trial, Floe was found guilty of all charges except the Forgery charge. Floe appealed on arguments that he was not prosecutable because he was a victim of the crimes of Assault Second Degree and Drive by Shooting.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The WA Court of Appeals reasoned that Floe was complicit in the crimes he committed against himself, saying that Floe initiated the plan and convinced Harris to carry out the Assault and Driveby Shooting. Moreover, Floe did more than merely consent to these crimes. Here, Floe came up with the plan, convinced Harris to assist him, and provided Harris with the gun she used during the crimes.

Next, the Court addressed the merits of Floe’s Conspiracy conviction. It stated that the appropriate focus of a conspiracy charge is on the conspiratorial agreement, not the specific criminal object or objects. To obtain a conviction, all the State needs to prove is that the conspirators agreed to undertake a criminal scheme and that they took a substantial step in furtherance of the conspiracy.

“Because Floe was charged with conspiracy to commit second degree assault and drive-by shooting, it is immaterial whether he was a victim of the conspiracy because Floe had already engaged in the criminalized conduct—agreeing to and taking a substantial step toward causing the performance of a crime with another, Harris. Floe’s argument based on the plain language of the statutes defining second degree assault and drive-by shooting fails.” ~WA Court of Appeals

With that, the WA Court of Appeals affirmed Mr. Floe’s  convictions.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.