Are Sentences Enhanced for Washington Cases Involving Deadly Weapons?

In many instances in which a defendant is convicted of a crime, the court has discretion with regard to the penalty to impose. In some cases, however, a sentence is mandatory and must be imposed regardless of a judge’s inclination to impose a lesser sentence.

A Washington law known as the Sentencing Reform Act provides standard sentencing ranges that set forth what the legislature has deemed an appropriate sentence for a crime. A sentencing court is not always required to abide by the standard sentence, and in some cases may set forth an exceptional sentence, which is a sentence that is below the sentencing range.

Washington Court Holds Deadly Weapon Enhancements Are Not Discretionary

Recently, a Washington Court of Appeals explained when a court’s refusal to issue an exceptional sentence and noted that a court’s discretion to impose an exceptional sentence does not extend to deadly weapon enhancements.

Reportedly, the defendant participated in what he believed was an organized robbery of a marijuana dispensary with some of the dispensary employees. The dispensary supervisor saw the robbery on surveillance video and called 911. The defendant and his co-conspirators were subsequently arrested and the defendant was charged with robbery in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment.

He pled guilty and was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment for the robbery charge, 3 months imprisonment for unlawful imprisonment, and a 60-month firearm enhancement, to be served after the 36-month sentence, which were the minimum standard range sentences. The defendant appealed his sentence, arguing the court failed to consider certain factors in favor of granting an exceptional sentence and that the court abused its discretion by not reducing the firearm enhancement.

Appealing a Sentence

On appeal, the court noted that while under the Sentencing Reform Act a standard range sentence cannot be appealed a defendant can challenge the method in which a standard range sentence is calculated. If a defendant challenges the denial of an exceptional sentence, the court’s review is limited to whether the court imposing the sentence refused to issue an exceptional sentence regardless of the circumstances or relied on impermissible grounds for refusing to do so.

Here, the defendant did not seek an exceptional sentence but agreed that he would not ask for a downward departure as part of his plea agreement. The court stated, however, that this did not preclude him from challenging the sentence if the sentencing court mistakenly found that an exceptional sentence was not available to the defendant. The court found that the sentencing court found the defendant’s arguments insufficient to justify an exceptional sentence and therefore, the sentence should not be disturbed.

Firearm Enhancement

Further, the defendant argued that the Sentencing Reform Act granted the sentencing court the discretion to shorten the length of the firearm enhancement as an exceptional sentence. The court disagreed, stating that under Washington law, the firearm enhancement was mandatory. Moreover, the court noted that the Supreme Court of Washington held that a court’s discretion to impose an exceptional sentence was not extended to deadly weapon enhancements. As such, the court found that the sentencing court was not permitted to shorten the firearm enhancement, and affirmed the sentence.

Example: A Washington Court Tries to Add On to an Agreed Plea Agreement

Recently, the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1, discussed whether an exceptional sentence is permitted in a case in which the defendant was convicted of domestic violence assault with a deadly weapon.

The defendant’s father had a domestic violence no-contact order that barred the defendant from coming within 500 feet of his father’s house. In January 2018, however, the police received a call that the defendant entered the father’s home and repeatedly stabbed his brother-in-law with a steak knife. The defendant was arrested on the following day and admitted to stabbing his brother-in-law, and he stated that he knew that he was not supposed to be in his father’s house. He was charged with domestic violence assault with a deadly weapon.

The defendant entered into a plea agreement and requested an exceptional sentence. The court granted the request in part, imposing an exceptional sentence of time served and the mandatory 12-month enhancement for deadly weapons. The defendant appealed, arguing that the court erred in finding that it did not have the discretion to impose an exceptional sentence for the weapons enhancement.

A Court’s Discretion to Impose an Exceptional Sentence

Under Washington law, a court’s erroneous belief that it lacks the discretion to impose an exceptional sentence is an abuse of discretion that may be reversed. Furthermore, the court stated that a court could impose an exceptional sentence that is below the standard range in cases in which the evidence of record justifies such a sentence. In the subject case, however, the court noted that a court could not abuse discretion that it does not have. Specifically, it held that neither case law nor the language of the statute supported the argument that the court had the discretion to impose a lesser sentence.

Instead, the court found that the clear language of the statute stated that if a defendant was armed with a deadly weapon during the commission of a crime, and the defendant is subsequently sentenced for a class B felony, the court must add an additional 12 months to the defendant’s sentence. Furthermore, the statutory language clearly stated that the enhancement was mandatory. As a result, the court found that the sentencing court did not err in finding that it lacked the discretion to impose an exceptional sentence for the deadly weapons enhancement.

Consult an Experienced Defense Attorney

If you live in Washington and are charged with a domestic violence offense, it is in your best interest to consult an experienced Washington domestic violence attorney about developing a strategy to help you fight to protect your rights. The assertive criminal defense attorneys at the Law Offices of Smith & White will work tirelessly to help you seek the best result available under the facts of your case. You can contact us through our form online or at (253) 203-1645 to set up a complimentary and confidential meeting.