State of Washington v. Joseph Martial Wonch
33553-4
| Wash. Ct. App. | Oct 25, 2016Background
- Joseph Wonch pleaded guilty to two counts of possession (oxycodone, methamphetamine) and one count of second-degree unlawful possession of a firearm; the plea included an agreed exceptional sentence.
- In 2012 he was sentenced to 84 months on the drug counts and ordered to pay $2,300 in fines/costs, including a $500 discretionary attorney fee.
- Wonch successfully obtained relief via a personal restraint petition challenging the 84-month drug terms as exceeding sentencing authority; the court ordered resentencing limiting drug imprisonment to 60 months. The PRP did not address LFOs.
- At the 2015 resentencing the parties agreed only to reduce the term from 84 to 60 months and to carry forward the original LFOs; defense counsel did not raise ability-to-pay (Blazina) inquiry for discretionary LFOs.
- Wonch appealed, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to raise the Blazina inquiry at the 2015 resentencing; he conceded the 2012 sentence was superseded so only the 2015 counsel-performance issue remained.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective at the 2015 resentencing for not requesting a Blazina ability-to-pay inquiry before imposing discretionary LFOs | Wonch: counsel erred by failing to raise a Blazina inquiry, violating Strickland | State: counsel’s performance was reasonable in context of negotiated reduction and outcome would not differ; Blazina relief still available by motion | Court held Wonch failed to prove prejudice under Strickland; ineffective assistance claim denied |
| Whether failure to raise Blazina at resentencing deprived Wonch of ability to challenge LFOs | Wonch: loss of opportunity to litigate ability to pay at resentencing | State: ability to seek remission or raise challenge by motion preserves the claim | Court held the record does not show prejudice; ability to seek remission/motion preserved challenge |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827 (Wa. 2015) (trial court must inquire into defendant's ability to pay before imposing discretionary LFOs)
- State v. Lyle, 188 Wn. App. 848 (Wa. Ct. App. 2015) (prejudice required to show different outcome on collateral attack of LFOs)
- State v. Foster, 140 Wn. App. 266 (Wa. Ct. App. 2007) (procedural note on Strickland prongs)
Decision: Judgment affirmed; Wonch did not show Strickland prejudice from counsel’s alleged failure to request a Blazina inquiry.