State Of Washington v. Anthony A. Moretti, 47868-4

Background

On Sept. 11, 2014 Michael Knapp (victim) and Tyson Ball went to a boat launch to buy meth; they were assaulted and Knapp was robbed of about $1,000. Two assailants attacked: Samuel Hill (identified by victims) and Anthony Moretti (identified via photo montages and witness Hoey).
Moretti was charged with first-degree robbery and two counts of second-degree assault (one as to Knapp, one as to Ball); the State filed POAA notice seeking life without release.
At trial there were contested evidentiary matters: testimony about investigative leads, a detective’s references to a “co-defendant/co-conspirator,” impeachment of witness Halli Hoey, and a juror who may have seen Moretti in restraints.
Jury convicted Moretti on all counts; at sentencing the State proved two prior “most serious” convictions via certified records and the court imposed life without possibility of release under the POAA and assessed LFOs.
On appeal Moretti challenged prosecutor misconduct, denial of mistrial and juror/shackles issues, ineffective assistance, constitutionality and procedure of the POAA sentence, sufficiency of proof of priors, LFOs (ability to pay), and double jeopardy/merger of assault with robbery.

Issues

Issue	Moretti’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Prosecutorial misconduct (hearsay, bolstering, improper references to co-defendant)	Prosecutor elicited prejudicial hearsay/opinion and repeatedly bolstered witnesses; comment that Hill was a "co-defendant/co-conspirator" required mistrial	Testimony was proper (investigative context or identification), many objections were sustained, references were not substantially prejudicial	No misconduct affecting verdict; no mistrial abuse of discretion
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Defense counsel failed to object when improper evidence/opinions were elicited and during closing	Counsel’s performance was reasonable; cited matters were not improper so no prejudice	Claim fails: counsel not deficient or prejudicial
POAA sentence: Eighth Amendment / cruel & unusual	Life without parole under POAA is disproportionate given offenses and Moretti’s youth at first strike	POAA serves deterrence/segregation; Fain proportionality factors support POAA	Sentence upheld under state constitutional test (Fain factors); no Eighth Amendment violation
POAA procedure: jury trial / burden on priors	Moretti contends prior convictions must be proved to a jury beyond reasonable doubt	Washington precedent allows judge to find priors by preponderance and sentence under POAA	No jury right to determine priors; certified judgments met preponderance standard
Sufficiency of prior conviction proof (vehicular assault) / collateral attack	Plea form omitted boilerplate; conviction validity insufficient for POAA predicate	State produced certified judgment; defendant must collaterally attack prior separately	State met burden; collateral attack improper in this proceeding
LFOs: ability to pay	Sentencing court did not inquire into current/future ability to pay before imposing discretionary LFOs	State did not oppose striking non-mandatory LFOs	Remanded: strike discretionary LFOs; court failed to make individualized inquiry
Double jeopardy / merger of assault and robbery	Assault convictions should merge with robbery to avoid multiple punishments	Some assaults had independent purpose (e.g., Ball) so should not merge	Robbery merged with assault as to Knapp (no independent purpose); assault conviction as to Ball affirmed

Key Cases Cited

In re Pers. Restraint of Glasmann, 175 Wn.2d 696 (prosecutorial misconduct standard)
State v. Emery, 174 Wn.2d 741 (standard for reviewing unobjected-to prosecutorial misconduct)
State v. Powell, 126 Wn.2d 244 (identification statements and hearsay exception)
State v. Thorgerson, 172 Wn.2d 438 (prosecutor’s latitude in arguing inferences and credibility)
State v. Kirkman, 159 Wn.2d 918 (impermissible opinion testimony re: defendant’s guilt)
State v. Witherspoon, 180 Wn.2d 875 (POAA procedure: judge may find priors by preponderance)
State v. Rivers, 129 Wn.2d 697 (POAA purpose and proportionality analysis)
Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (Eighth Amendment principles re: mandatory life without parole for youth)
State v. O’Dell, 183 Wn.2d 680 (youthful characteristics relevant to sentencing discretion)
State v. Houston-Sconiers, 188 Wn.2d 1 (requirement to consider mitigating qualities of youth at sentencing)