State v. Chenoweth

¶15 (dissenting) The majority holds that because the statutes under which defendant was convicted, RCW 9A.44.079 (rape of a child in the third degree) and RCW 9A.64.020(1) (incest in the first degree), do not share the same statutory intent elements, defendant Chad Cheno-weth’s convictions must necessarily fail to qualify as the “same criminal conduct” under RCW 9.94A.589(l)(a) for sentencing purposes. I disagree. For the reasons discussed below, in my view, the circumstances of this case warrant counting the six pairs of incest and child rape convictions, based on six separate incidents of…