State Of Washington v. Marlon Octavius Luvell House, 75641-9

Marlon House was charged in two cause numbers with multiple counts including rape of a child in the first degree; he pleaded guilty to two counts of first‑degree child rape under an amended information.
At a pretrial status conference House requested substitute counsel, claiming poor communication; his public defender explained he had investigated witnesses but delayed interviewing the two child victims to preserve plea negotiation options.
House sought the Special Sex Offender Sentencing Alternative (SSOSA); a psychosexual evaluation by Michael Comte recommended treatment and assessed low risk, but the State and probation opposed SSOSA, citing House’s lack of candor and victim impact.
The trial court denied the substitution request, concluded the SSOSA was inappropriate, and imposed concurrent sentences of 160 months to life on each count.
House appealed, arguing (1) the court erred by denying substitute counsel, (2) the court abused discretion denying SSOSA, and (3) his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by delaying victim interviews and not securing a fuller psychosexual evaluation.

Issue	House's Argument	State/Respondent's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying substitute counsel	Counsel failed to communicate and refused to interview victims, showing breakdown in representation	Counsel had investigated, explained tactical reason for delaying victim interviews; court’s inquiry was adequate	Denial upheld — no breakdown; court’s inquiry sufficient and no actual bias shown
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying SSOSA	Psychosexual report was deficient; polygraph and report did not support denial	Report met statutory requirements; concerns about candor, community risk, and victim opposition justified denial	Denial upheld — no abuse of discretion; report and testimony sufficient
Whether counsel was ineffective for delaying interviews of victims (pre‑plea)	Failure to investigate victims prejudiced plea decision	Delay was strategic to preserve plea negotiations per local prosecutor policy; other investigations performed	No ineffective assistance — strategic, reasonable decision; no prejudice shown
Whether counsel was ineffective re: psychosexual report and sentencing hearing	Counsel should have sought supplemental report or more thorough questioning at sentencing	Report complied with statute and testimony clarified issues; additional questioning would not likely change outcome	No ineffective assistance — performance not deficient and no prejudice established

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard for prejudice and performance)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice standard for guilty plea challenges)
State v. Varga, 151 Wn.2d 179 (standards for substitute counsel and good cause)
State v. Kyllo, 166 Wn.2d 856 (presumption counsel performance is reasonable)
State v. Grier, 171 Wn.2d 17 (tactical decisions and assessing counsel effectiveness)