State of Washington v. Dwayne Otto Runge, 34371-5

Dwayne Runge was convicted of one count of second-degree possession of stolen property and two counts of second-degree identity theft.
At sentencing defense counsel requested a low-end standard range term; the court considered but declined a Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative (DOSA).
The court imposed a 45-month prison sentence plus 12 months community custody for the identity-theft counts.
Runge appealed, claiming ineffective assistance for (1) counsel’s failure to request a DOSA and (2) counsel’s failure to argue the offenses constituted the same criminal conduct (affecting offender score).
He also raised supplemental claims alleging perjured testimony by Detective Hobbs and additional ineffective assistance allegations (failure to suppress evidence and review discovery).
The Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting Runge’s ineffective-assistance and waiver arguments and finding no prejudice from any asserted errors.

Issue	Runge's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for not requesting a DOSA	Counsel should have requested a DOSA at sentencing	Counsel reasonably suspected the court would deny DOSA; court independently inquired about DOSA	No ineffective assistance; counsel’s choice was reasonable and no prejudice shown
Whether offenses constitute same criminal conduct (offender score)	Counts overlapped (use of stolen debit card) and should have been scored as same conduct	Waiver: Runge failed to raise the issue below; in any event no prejudice because range unchanged	Waived on direct appeal; alternatively no prejudice even if counts were same conduct
Whether Detective Hobbs committed perjury	Hobbs falsely testified about prior knowledge of Runge	Record shows Hobbs testified he had no prior personal experience with Runge before the investigation	Claim rejected — testimony not perjured
Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving to suppress or reviewing discovery	Counsel failed to object/move to suppress evidence and failed to review discovery	Runge did not identify what evidence should have been suppressed and the disputed discovery is not in the record	Denied on direct appeal; proper vehicle is a personal restraint petition if facts outside the record exist

State v. McFarland, 899 P.2d 1251 (Wash. 1995) (two-prong ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Hendrickson, 917 P.2d 563 (Wash. 1996) (no need to address both prongs if one fails)
State v. Stenson, 940 P.2d 1239 (Wash. 1997) (objective reasonableness standard for counsel performance)
State v. McNeal, 37 P.3d 280 (Wash. 2002) (presumption of effective assistance and burden to show absence of strategic reason)
State v. Grayson, 111 P.3d 1183 (Wash. 2005) (DOSA purpose and discretionary nature of court’s decision)
State v. Nitsch, 997 P.2d 1000 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000) (failure to raise offender-score factual dispute below waives challenge on appeal)