context: Br. of Appellant at 8. And we further note that visible bruising itself rises to the level of temporary substantial disfigurement. See State v. Hovig, 149 Wn.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.parenthetical: "serious" "red and violet teeth-mark[ ]" bruising that lasted for 7 to 14 days constituted "substantial bodily injury"
citation_a.sentence: App. 1, 5, 13, 202 P.3d 318 (“serious” “red and violet teeth-mark[ ]” bruising that lasted for 7 to 14 days constituted “substantial bodily injury”), review denied, 166 Wn.2d 1020 (2009); see also State v. Ashcraft, 71 Wn. App. 444, 455, 859 P.2d 60 (1993) (bruises that resulted from being hit by a shoe were “ ‘temporary but substantial disfigurement’ ” (quoting RCW 9A.04.110(4)(b))).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 71 Wn. App. 444, 455
citation_b.parenthetical: bruises that resulted from being hit by a shoe were " 'temporary but substantial disfigurement' " (quoting RCW 9A.04.110(4)(b
citation_b.sentence: App. 1, 5, 13, 202 P.3d 318 (“serious” “red and violet teeth-mark[ ]” bruising that lasted for 7 to 14 days constituted “substantial bodily injury”), review denied, 166 Wn.2d 1020 (2009); see also State v. Ashcraft, 71 Wn. App. 444, 455, 859 P.2d 60 (1993) (bruises that resulted from being hit by a shoe were “ ‘temporary but substantial disfigurement’ ” (quoting RCW 9A.04.110(4)(b))).