In Re The Personal Restraint Petition Of Forrest E. Amos, 48430-7

Background

Forrest Amos was charged with multiple felonies and two gross misdemeanors; while jailed, officers executed a cell search for alleged witness-tampering and allegedly inspected his legal mail and defense materials.
Amos pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement that dismissed two counts, set aggregate sentences (including DOC custody for both felonies and gross misdemeanors), and contained express written and oral waivers of appeal and collateral attack (Amos initialed and confirmed waiver in court).
Defense counsel discussed but did not file a CrR 8.3(b) motion to dismiss based on the alleged intrusion into the attorney-client relationship; counsel also (allegedly) misadvised Amos about where gross misdemeanor time would be served.
The trial court later amended and then reinstated the original judgment and sentence; Amos filed a personal restraint petition (PRP) challenging (1) the validity of his collateral-attack waiver based on ineffective assistance of counsel tied to the alleged attorney-client breach and (2) the legality of serving gross misdemeanor time in DOC custody.
The Court of Appeals held the PRP timely, recognized that collateral-attack waivers are enforceable if knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, and found Amos made a prima facie showing that ineffective assistance may have undermined his waiver—remanding for an evidentiary hearing on disputed facts.
The court also held that sentencing gross misdemeanors to DOC custody was unauthorized by statute (following Besio) and therefore void, and remanded to the trial court to decide the appropriate remedy if charges are not dismissed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of PRP	Amos: PRP filed within one year of final judgment (after amendment vacated)	State: PRP filed more than one year after original judgment	PRP timely—judgment became final when amendment was vacated (Jan 8, 2015)
Enforceability of collateral-attack waiver	Amos: Waiver may be invalid due to ineffective assistance tied to state intrusion and counsel's failures	State: Waiver was knowingly and voluntarily made (written plea, colloquy)	Waivers of collateral attack are enforceable if knowing, voluntary, intelligent; State bears burden to prove this; ineffective assistance may vitiate waiver; remand for factual hearing
Effect of alleged intrusion into attorney-client materials	Amos: Inspection of privileged materials destroyed confidence in counsel, counsel should have moved to dismiss—presumed prejudice	State: Disputes that privileged materials were reviewed or transmitted; argues higher PRP prejudice standard applies	Court applies Fuentes/Cory presumption of prejudice for state intrusion unless State proves beyond a reasonable doubt no prejudice; factual issues remanded
Legality of serving gross misdemeanors in DOC	Amos: Serving gross misdemeanor time in DOC is unauthorized by statute	State: DOC can house combined terms under SRA; DOC programming is preferable	Following Besio and statutory text, court holds gross misdemeanor confinement must be in county jail; DOC confinement for gross misdemeanors void; remand to decide remedy

Key Cases Cited

State v. Smith, 134 Wn.2d 849 (defendant’s written plea statements create strong presumption waivers are voluntary)
State v. Sweet, 90 Wn.2d 282 (State must show waiver of appeal was voluntary, knowing, intelligent)
State v. Chetty, 167 Wn. App. 432 (ineffective assistance can bear on validity of appeal waiver; remand for hearing)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (counsel must advise on consequences where necessary; ineffective assistance in plea context)
State v. Fuentes, 179 Wn.2d 808 (presumption of prejudice for state intrusion into attorney-client communications; rebuttable only beyond reasonable doubt)
State v. Cory, 62 Wn.2d 371 (state spying on attorney-client communications can require dismissal; presumption of prejudice)
State v. Perrow, 156 Wn. App. 322 (police handling of defense-prepared documents implicated attorney-client confidentiality)
State v. Besio, 80 Wn. App. 426 (gross misdemeanors must be served in county jail even when sentenced with felonies)
In re Pers. Restraint of Goodwin, 146 Wn.2d 861 (legal sentencing errors exceeding statutory authority are not waivable)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)