State v. Farnsworth

*5¶1 Charles Farnsworth appeals two first degree robbery convictions and his sentence. He argues the trial court (1) violated his right to a speedy trial under CrR 3.3; (2) abused its discretion by suppressing evidence in response to the State’s discovery violation; (3) incorrectly calculated his offender score; (4) impermissibly found facts to support his offender score of 4, contrary to Blakely,1 and (5) violated his right to due process of law. He further argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance.

Hunt, J.

¶2 In a separate personal restraint petition (PRP), consolidated…