State v. Campbell

• Court: Washington Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Fearing, J.P.T.
• Docket Number: 40305-0-III
• Decision Date: 15 January 2026
• Citation: State v. Campbell, 40305-0-III (Wash. App. Jan 15, 2026)
• Parties: STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. DOUGLAS GLENN CAMPBELL Appellant.

1

STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. DOUGLAS GLENN CAMPBELL Appellant.

No. 40305-0-III

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 3

January 15, 2026

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Fearing, J.P.T. ^{[† ]}

Douglas Campbell appeals, on pretrial discovery and evidentiary grounds, three convictions of first degree child molestation of a step-grandson. Campbell also appeals the trial court's denial of a Special Sex Offender Sentencing Alternative (SSOSA). We affirm Campbell's convictions and sentence.

FACTS

The prosecution of Douglas Campbell arises from his interaction with W.R.A., a step-grandson. W.R.A. accused Campbell of touching W.R.A.'s penis and having W.R.A. touch his penis. We take the facts from trial testimony.

Douglas Campbell is married to Cathy Campbell. Because Douglas and Catherine (Cathy) Campbell share the same surname, we refer to Cathy by her first name but refer to Douglas using his surname. Campbell's marriage to Cathy is his fourth marriage.

Campbell has two biological children from his first marriage Jessica and Hollie Moreno, and two step-children from his second and third marriages, Mark Andrews and Shannon Stewart. Campbell's marriage to Cathy brought him two step-sons Matthew and Michael Alverson. Matthew is married to Lindsey Alverson. Because Matthew, Michael, and Lindsey share the same surname, we refer to each of them by their first names.

In either late 2017 or early 2018, Cathy and Douglas Campbell moved to Spokane to be closer to Matthew Alverson and Matthew's two children, W.R.A. and E.A. W.R.A. was born on May 1, 2012, and E.A. was born in 2015. The Campbells frequently babysat W.R.A. and E.A., and these grandchildren occasionally stayed at their house for overnight visits.

On July 29, 2021, Camela Davies, Lindsey Alverson's mother and W.R.A.'s maternal grandmother, played with W.R.A. at Lindsey and Matthew's residence. W.R.A. was then nine years old. Davies had slept at the Alverson residence the previous night. W.R.A. asked Davies why she did not sleep in his bed. This conversation led to W.R.A. mentioning Douglas Campbell, his paternal step-grandfather. W.R.A. told Davies that he and Campbell slept naked when he spent the night at his grandparents' house, that Campbell taught him how to play with his penis, and that Campbell taught him how to play with Campbell's penis. W.R.A. told Davies that "playing with his penis felt good." Clerk's Papers (CP) at 5. When Davies told W.R.A. that Campbell should not be doing that, W.R.A's face turned red, and he told her Campbell said not to tell anyone.

Camela Davies immediately relayed W.R.A.'s disclosure to W.R.A.'s mother, Lindsey Alverson. Lindsey then spoke with W.R.A. W.R.A. told her that Douglas Campbell had touched his privates and told him to keep it a secret. The mother did not ask W.R.A. about any details of the touching.

On August 1, 2021, Spokane County Deputy Sheriff David Bratton visited Lindsey and Matthew Alverson's residence in response to a report of child molestation. After interviewing both Matthew and Lindsey, Sheriff Deputy Bratton forwarded his case report to Spokane County Sheriff's Department Detective Michael Wall, who assumed supervision of the investigation. Detective Wall scheduled a forensic interview for W.R.A., with Meghan Davidson at Partners with Families and Children. Davidson interviewed W.R.A. and his sister, E.A., on August 24, 2021.

PROCEDURE

On December 15, 2021, the state of Washington charged Douglas Campbell with three counts of first degree child molestation. The charging information alleged Campbell committed these crimes against W.R.A. sometime between January 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021. W.R.A. turned 8-years-old on May 1, 2020, and 9 years old on May 1, 2021.

On January 11, 2022, the State filed notice to present child hearsay testimony at trial. The notice declared the State's intent to admit statements W.R.A. made to Camela Davies, Lindsey Alverson, Matthew Alverson, and Meghan Davidson.

On December 21, 2022, Douglas Campbell filed a motion and memorandum to admit reputation and good conduct evidence under ER 404(a)(1) and 405(a), (b) from Mark Andrews, Jacob Andrews, Shannon Stuart, Wyatt Shaw, Dakoda Gonzalezz, Matthew Alverson, Michael Alverson, Deborah Allen, Victoria Fischer, Pamela Lux-Archer, Sophia Lux-Archer, and Devon Lux-Archer. All of these individuals are family members of Campbell, except for the Lux-Archers. The Lux-Archers were neighbors of the Campbells. Campbell argued that, because of the difficulty of defending W.R.A.'s vague accusations, the trial court should permit testimony from individuals who, for years, had uniquely observed his propensity or lack thereof to have sexual contact with a child. Campbell wrote that his proposed witnesses belonged to a family community that interacted with him for many years. Campbell declared that these individuals would have testified that he lacked any propensity to touch a child for his sexual gratification and that he had a reputation within the community for good sexual morality. Nevertheless, when outlining the expected testimony of each witness, the outline mentioned only the witnesses' contact with Campbell and their observations of his interactions with children. The outlines did not specify that any witness knew of a reputation of Campbell for good sexual morality, how the witness knew of that reputation, and the community in which the reputation arose.

The State opposed Douglas Campbell's motion to introduce evidence of good reputation and conduct for two reasons. First, all proffered witnesses lacked neutrality because of being family members or close friends. Second, no party may introduce evidence of prior acts merely to demonstrate a person's character or propensity for engaging in charged conduct when character is not an element of the criminal charge.

On February 17, 2023, the trial court conducted a hearing on Douglas Campbell's motion to admit reputation and good conduct evidence. During the hearing, Campbell talked about wishing to introduce reputation evidence, but Campbell never identified any witness who would testify to a community in which Campbell held a reputation.

After hearing testimony, the trial court denied Douglas Campbell's motion for introduction of evidence. The court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law, which read in part:

II. Findings of Fact

A. Evidence Rule 404(a)(1)-Reputation Evidence

1. Defendant proffered a list of approximately a dozen proposed witnesses to testify about the sexual morality of Defendant. . . . .

3.These witnesses, with the exception of Pamela, Sophia, and Devon Lux-Archer, are related to Defendant by blood or marriage and constitutes [sic] a large and extended family.

4.This group cannot form a neutral and general community based on the inherent nature of family relationship.

5.The Lux-Archers were once neighbors of Defendant and the three proposed witnesses all lived within one household.

6.Neighbors, such as the Lux-Archers, could potentially comprise a more general community based on the nature of the relationship, but there is not a proper foundation at this time due to the limited group that has been proffered.

7.Other communities who could potentially form a neutral and general community would include, but not be limited to, a business community, neighborhood community, and a school community.

B. Evidence Rule 405-Specific Instances of Conduct

1. Defendant summarizes potential testimony of specific instances of conduct to include the following:

a. A camping trip with proposed witness Mark Andrews and Defendant where nothing sexual happened; and

b. An overnight off-road adventure with proposed witness Wyatt Shaw here nothing sexual happened; and

c. A time when Defendant would not get out of bed naked specifically so that W.R.A. would not see him naked through proposed witness Matt Alverson.

III. Conclusions of Law

A. Evidence Rule 404(1)(a)-Reputation Evidence

1. State v. Cox, 17 Wash.App. 2d 178 (2021) found that reputation for good sexual morality is relevant so long as the proper foundation can be laid.

2. The facts in Cox are relevant. Defendant proffered four coworkers as well as friends to testify about his reputation within that community and the anticipated testimony would be that they had never heard anything negative about Defendant's sexual morality. Id.

3. Cox found that, subject to the proper foundation, Defendant can introduce reputation evidence of good sexual morality. Id.

4. In order to establish the proper foundation, the moving party must show that the community is both neutral and general.

5. It is important for the Court to consider the types of people and the number of people purported to constitute the community.

6. Based on State v. Gregory, 158 Wn.2d 759, 147 P.2d [P.3d] 1201 (2006), a community must comprise of more than two people.

7. Based on case law, family cannot comprise a neutral and general community based on the inherent nature of the familial relationships.

[B.] Evidence Rule 405-Specific Instances of Conduct

1.Based on State v. Lorenz, 152 Wn.2d 22, 93 P.3d 133 (2004), sexual gratification is not an essential element of Child Molestation because it does not appear in the Child Molestation statute, but is in the definitions section.

2.Sexual gratification is not an essential element of Child Molestation and specific instances of conduct cannot be offered under ER 405.

CP at 55-57.

On May 11, 2023, Douglas Campbell filed a second motion and memorandum to admit evidence under ER 404(a)(1). In the motion, Campbell wrote that the trial court had previously ruled that his family did not form a credible community and thence denied his request for testimony from family members about his reputation for...