State Of Washington v. Coba Palmer, Jr., & Prp Of Coba Palmer, Jr., 48323-8

Background

Palmer was booked on an initial residential burglary charge (cause No. 14-1-03795-5) in September 2014, released on bail, then rebooked on that charge and additional burglary/theft charges (cause No. 14-1-04764-1) on November 24, 2014, and remained in custody thereafter until transfer to DOC after sentencing.
On July 15, 2015, Palmer pleaded guilty under a plea agreement; at sentencing (July 27, 2015) the State recommended concurrent 63-month terms on both causes and recommended credit for presentence time served.
The trial court sentenced Palmer to concurrent 63-month terms and directed DOC to compute presentence credit; DOC awarded 9 days on the original charge and 248 days on the additional charges, omitting substantial presentence time on the original charge between Nov. 24, 2014 and July 27, 2015.
Palmer filed a timely CrR 7.8 motion in superior court seeking modification to obtain concurrent presentence credit on both causes; the trial court denied the motion without transferring it as a PRP or holding a show-cause hearing.
Palmer appealed and filed a personal restraint petition (PRP) challenging the lack of full presentence credit; the Court of Appeals consolidated the direct appeal and PRP and resolved the claims.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Trial court failed to award concurrent presentence credit on direct appeal	Palmer: court erred by not exercising discretion under RCW 9.94A.505(6) and violated due process/equal protection	State: credit determination is factual/record-based and DOC computes credits; issues rely on matters outside record	Not considered on direct appeal — arguments rely on matters outside the record, so court declined review
Trial court denied CrR 7.8 motion without transfer or show-cause hearing	Palmer: trial court should have transferred motion to Court of Appeals or held a show-cause hearing	State: concedes error but argues it was harmless	Court: trial court abused discretion under CrR 7.8(c) but error was harmless because Palmer promptly filed PRP raising same claims
SAG: clerk failed to file motion / clerk lacked authority to deny	Palmer: clerk’s actions violated due process and clerk could not deny motion	State: clerk filed the motion and trial court denied it	Rejected — record shows clerk filed motion and trial court denied it
PRP: failure to credit all presentence time on original charge	Palmer: due process/equal protection require credit for all pretrial confinement on multiple charges (no double credit)	State: RCW 9.94A.505(6) permits credit for only one offense during overlapping confinement	Court: grants PRP as DOC did not credit Palmer for presentence time on the original charge between Nov. 24, 2014 and July 27, 2015; remands to DOC to recalculate credit; due process/equal protection violated by omission

Key Cases Cited

In re Pers. Restraint of Coggin, 182 Wn.2d 115 (discusses actual and substantial prejudice standard for constitutional PRP claims)
State v. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d 322 (record limitations for direct appeal review)
State v. Robinson, 153 Wn.2d 689 (harmless error review for court rule violations)
State v. Watson, 63 Wn. App. 854 (definition of "credit for time served" in plea bargains)
State v. Speaks, 119 Wn.2d 204 (constitutional right to credit for presentence confinement)
State v. Lewis, 184 Wn.2d 201 (holding that due process requires credit for presentence time served on multiple charges without double counting)