In re the Personal Restraint of LaChapelle
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 We are asked again to examine the 1997, 2000, and 2002 amendments to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA), chapter 9.94A RCW We adhere to our decisions in State v. Cruz, 139 Wn.2d 186, 985 P.2d 384 (1999), State v. Smith, 144 Wn.2d 665, 30 P.3d 1245 (2001), *4and State v. Varga, 151 Wn.2d 179, 86 P.3d 139 (2004), and hold that under the 2000 amendment to the SRA, the trial court should not have counted previously “washed out” convictions in calculating an offender score for the purpose of sentencing. We therefore reverse and remand for the petitioners to be resentenced.
Chambers, J.
*4¶2…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Lynce v. MathisSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- State v. DunawayWashington Supreme Court · 1988
- In re the Personal Restraint of GoodwinWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. VargaWashington Supreme Court · 2004
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- In re the Personal Restraint of CoatsWashington Supreme Court · 2011
- Roberson v. PerezWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- Roberson v. PerezWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. ANJWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- Hale v. Wellpinit School Dist. No. 49Washington Supreme Court · 2009
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.