State Of Washington, Respondent V. Khalid Mohamed Haybe, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent,
v.
KHALID MOHAMED HAYBE,
Appellant.
No. 83153-4-I
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
MANN , J. — Khalid Haybe appeals his conviction for unlawful possession of a
firearm in the first degree. Haybe argues that the court violated his constitutional right
to a fair and impartial jury by refusing to excuse a prospective juror despite unresolved
bias. We affirm.
I.
The State charged Haybe with first degree unlawful firearm possession. During
jury selection, prospective juror 16 expressed misgivings about serving on a case
involving a gun. But she stated she would need to be convinced beyond a reasonable
doubt before convicting.
At the end of questioning, Haybe challenged 9 jurors for cause, including juror
16. The court denied Haybe’s motion to excuse juror 16 for cause. Neither party

No. 83153-4-I/2
-2-
exercised a peremptory challenge against juror 16. Haybe accepted the panel with juror
16, despite having 1 peremptory challenge available.
Haybe appeals.
II.
Haybe argues that the trial court erred in refusing to excuse juror 16 for cause.
We decline to consider the argument given our Supreme Court’s recent decision in
State v. Talbott, No. 100540-7, slip op. at 1, 22 (Wash. Dec. 22, 2022),
https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1005407.pdf. In Talbott, the court considered
whether a party who declines to remove a prospective juror with an available
peremptory challenge has the right to appeal the seating of that juror. Talbott, No.
100540-7, slip op. at 1. The court held that “if a party allows a juror to be seated and
does not exhaust their peremptory challenges, then they cannot appeal on the basis
that the juror should have been excused for cause.” Talbott, No. 100540-7, slip op. at
22.
Talbott is dispositive. Haybe accepted the panel without exhausting his
peremptory challenges. Haybe is therefore not entitled to have his for-cause challenge
to juror 16 considered on appeal.
We affirm.
WE CONCUR:
________________________________