Facts: Petitioner Daniel Simms was convicted of robbery, assault, and unlawful possession of a firearm in the Superior Court for King County and sentenced. As Simms had previously been convicted of assault while armed with a firearm, the firearm enhancement applied to his sentence was doubled pursuant to Washington Revised Code §9.94A.533(3). Simms subsequently appealed his sentence, asserting that the respondent state of Washington was required to allege in the information specifying the essential elements of the firearm enhancement that he had previously been sentenced to a firearm enhancement in order to provide sufficient notice and allow him to prepare a defense. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Simms’ sentence. Simms appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s): Is the state required to allege in its information that a defendant has previously been sentenced to a firearm enhancement when seeking a double enhancement pursuant to §9.94A.533(3)?

Conclusion: Justice James M. Johnson’s opinion for a unanimous Court affirmed the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that as the firearm enhancement for Simms’ previous conviction was not a fact supporting an element of the charged crime, the state was not required to include it in its information despite the fact that it doubled the firearm enhancement imposed.

Docket No. 83826-7 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 60365-5)

Petitioner: Daniel Simms

(Counsel: Gregory Charles Link)

Respondent: State of Washington

(Counsel: Dennis John McCurdy)

Briefs:

Argument: Thursday, January 20, 2011 1:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, April 7th, 2011

Prevailing Party: State of Washington (Respondent)

Vote: 9-0

Citation: Pending

Court: Madsen2 Court (2011-)

Madsen

Johnson

Alexander

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson
(Majority)

Stephens

Wiggins

Opinion