Court: Snohomish County jurors’ opaque masks didn’t taint verdict

EVERETT — A 2021 debate over face masks in the courtroom is the reason an Everett man, found guilty of shooting a man in his carpool group, claims he was denied an impartial jury.

A new state Court of Appeals opinion ruling filed upheld his convictions.

Justin Bell, 32, went on trial in Snohomish County Superior Court in 2021, one year into the pandemic. At the time, masks and face coverings were required in public spaces to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Before the trial, Bell requested potential jurors wear transparent face shields instead of face masks to fully see their mouth and nose. Bell said a transparent mask would make it easier to analyze a potential juror’s demeanor during questioning. Superior Court Judge Richard Okrent denied this request as a “safety concern,” rather than a legal question of fairness, the opinion said.

On Dec. 14, 2017, Bell and a member of his carpool group got into a heated argument in the parking lot at Value Village at 6220 Evergreen Way, court documents say. Bell, who was the driver of the group to Stanwood, required each passenger to pay $5 in gas each day.

The man, however, claimed he was the only one paying consistently, according to court documents. That led to a fight, but the passenger reportedly walked away with his girlfriend, telling Bell it wasn’t worth it.

Security footage reviewed by prosecutors showed Bell getting into his black Hyundai Elantra, driving slowly into traffic with his windows down. Bell then shot the man three times, once in his left arm, left ankle and buttocks, before he sped off, according to court documents.

Bell was arrested in California in May 2020, nearly 3½ years later.

In October 2021, a jury found Bell guilty of one count of first-degree assault and one count of drive-by shooting.

Under state guidelines, Bell faced a standard sentence of 9¼ to 12¼ years, plus a five- year sentencing enhancement because the crime was committed with a firearm. Judge Okrent sentenced Bell to 14¼ years, at the low end of the sentencing range.

In January, the Court of Appeals found “the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Bell’s request” for clear masks.

“The court is not persuaded that Bell’s request violated his right to an impartial jury,” the opinion said.

The court ruled the trial was “responsive to Bell’s concerns,” offering the defendant an online option for jury selection per the county’s emergency order, documents say. Bell, however, denied the option.

“While acknowledging the necessity that the parties need to be able to ascertain bias, courts emphasize the countervailing need to provide for safety of all participants in the midst of the pandemic,” the opinion said.

The documents cited a similar case, United States v. Trimarc, in which the New York District Court opine that people have become accustomed to conversing with masks on for the past year and a half.

The Court of Appeals ruling addressed two other issues raised on appeal: if his convictions violated double jeopardy and if his sentence violated Washington’s sentencing laws

In February, appellate attorneys for the state filed a motion in the Court of Appeals to reconsider the third issue, claiming Bell’s sentence was unlawful under Washington’s statutory scheme, because it “does not allow multiple sentences for the same criminal conduct,” the motion says.

The Courts of Appeal ruled the victims of the assault (Bell’s co-worker) and the drive-by shooting (his girlfriend and the “general public”) were different — meaning the conviction was upheld.

Bell remained behind bars this week in Stafford Creek Corrections Center near Aberdeen.

Maya Tizon: 425-339-3434; maya.tizon@heraldnet.com; Twitter: @mayatizon.