IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 68764-6-1 Respondent, DIVISION ONE v.

EMILIO HERNANDEZ, UNPUBLISHED OPINION Appellant. FILED: OCT 1 4 2013

Per Curiam. — Emilio Hernandez appeals the sentence imposed following his convictions for first degree rape and first degree robbery. He contends the court erred in instructing the jury that it had a "duty" to return a guilty verdict if it found the elements of the crime were proved beyond a reasonable doubt. But the State correctly points out, and Hernandez does not dispute, that Hernandez invited the error by using the same language in his proposed instructions. Review is therefore precluded. City of Seattle v. Patu, 147 Wn.2d 717, 720-21, 58 P.3d 273 (2002). Hernandez has filed a pro se statement of additional grounds but fails to adequately describe the nature and occurrence of any alleged error as required by RAP 10.10(c). rv Affirmed. Z_ For the court:

t*k j. to

& -£• yyv\« J V J~44e/