Blog Archives

State v. Hunley

by
Docket No. 86135-8 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 39676-9)
Synopsis: Whether RCW 9.94A.500(1) and .530(2), which provide that a prosecutor’s criminal history summary is prima facie evidence of a defendant’s prior convictions, and that a defendant’s “acknowledgment” of criminal history includes not objecting to the prosecutor’s summary, unconstitutionally relieves the State of its burden to prove prior convictions for sentencing purposes.

Washington v. Rowland

by

Docket No. 86117-0 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 64262-6)  Facts:  Petitioner Michael Rowland was convicted of first degree murder and taking a motor vehicle without permission in the Superior Court for Snohomish County.  Based upon the judge’s finding of deliberate cruelty, Rowland was sentenced to an exceptional sentence.  Rowland subsequently filed a personal restraint petition in the Washington Court of Appeals challenging the calculation of his offender score.  After the state of Washington conceded that Rowland’s offender score had been improperly calculated, the Washington Court of Appeals remanded the case for resentencing.  On remand, the superior court imposed a standard range sentence corresponding to the reduced offender score and reimposed the sentence enhancement for deliberate cruelty.  Rowland appealed his sentence, asserting that a jury finding was required to support the exceptional sentence under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely v. Washington. Continue reading →

State v. Saenz

by
Docket No. 84949-8 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 27683-0)
Synopsis: Whether, in attempting to prove the existence of a prior strike offense for persistent offender purposes, the State adequately established that the defendant, who was a juvenile when he committed the prior offense, validly waived juvenile court jurisdiction and consented to trial in adult court, qualifying the offense as a strike offense.

Washington v. Siers

by

Docket No. 85469-6 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 63697-9)  Facts:  Respondent Brian Siers was charged with two counts of second degree assault after stabbing two men, one of whom was attempting to break up a fight between Siers and another person, outside of a Seattle restaurant.  Although no aggravating circumstances were alleged in the information, the state of Washington notified Siers prior to trial of its intent to seek a good Samaritan aggravator on one of the counts.  After the state and Siers had each rested their case, Siers objected to the state’s proposed jury instructions on grounds that the good Samaritan aggravator had not been charged in the information.  The trial court overruled Siers’ objection and Siers was found guilty of both charges.  The jury also returned a special verdict finding that Siers assaulted one of the victims while they were acting as a good Samaritan.  Siers appealed his conviction and the Washington Court of Appeals reversed on grounds that the state’s failure to plead the good Samaritan aggravator in the information functionally undermined the jury’s verdict on the substantive crime of second degree assault. Continue reading →

In re personal restraint of Talley

by

Docket No. 83284-6 (from Pierce Case No. 08-1-04680-1 & 08-1-04682-8)  Facts:  Petitioner Teddy Talley was convicted of murder in the Superior Court for Skamania County and sentenced.  Talley subsequently appealed his sentence, asserting that the Skamania County Jail’s failure to provide him with opportunities to earn good time credit while he was awaiting sentencing violated his rights under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Continue reading →

Washington v. Franklin

by

Docket No. 84545-0 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 61481-9)  Facts:  Petitioner John Franklin was convicted of third degree assault and possession of cocaine with intent to deliver in the Superior Court for King County and sentenced to a term of imprisonment to be followed by a variable term of community custody.  Given the variable length of the term of community custody, the trial court subsequently added a notation to Franklin’s sentence directing the Department of Corrections to ensure that the time Franklin spends imprisoned and in community custody does not exceed the statutory maximums for the offenses he was convicted of.  Franklin appealed his sentence, asserting that it is an indeterminate sentence and therefore in violation of the Sentencing Reform Act (Washington Revised Code §9.94A).  The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Franklin’s sentence.  Franklin moved for reconsideration in light of amendments to §9.94A that require sentencing courts to impose fixed terms of community custody. Continue reading →

Washington v. Griffin

by

Docket No. 84554-9 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 38705-1)  Facts:  Petitioner James Griffin was convicted of residential burglary in the Superior Court for Grays Harbor County and sentenced to an exceptional sentence after the trial court found the aggravating circumstance of rapid recidivism in a fact-finding hearing convened pursuant to Washington Revised Code §9.94A.537.  Griffin appealed his sentence, asserting that the trial court erred in relying upon inadmissible hearsay to find the aggravating circumstance.  The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Griffin’s sentence, holding that the rules of evidence do not apply to sentencing. Continue reading →

Washington v. Gordon

by

Docket No. 84240-0 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 63815-7)  Facts:  Respondent John Gordon was convicted of murder in the Superior Court for Pierce County and sentenced to an exceptional sentence pursuant to the jury’s finding that the aggravating factors of deliberate cruelty and particular vulnerability of the victim were present.  Gordon subsequently appealed his sentence, asserting that the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury as to the legal elements of deliberate cruelty and particular vulnerability of victim constituted error of constitutional magnitude that could be raised for the first time on appeal. Continue reading →

In re personal restraint of Carrier

by

Docket No. 83377-0  Facts:  Petitioner Harry Carrier was convicted of first degree child molestation, dealing in depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and possession of depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct and was sentenced, on the basis of a criminal history that included a prior conviction for indecent liberties, to life in prison without the possibility of parole under the Persistent Offender Accountability Act (Washington Revised Code §9.94A).  Carrier subsequently filed an untimely personal restraint petition in the Supreme Court of Washington that asserted that his sentence is invalid on its face insofar as his prior conviction for indecent liberties, which was dismissed in 1985 under Washington Revised Code §9.95.240 after he successfully completed probation, was improperly included in his criminal history. Continue reading →