State Of Washington v. Richard Arnold Lane
76028-9
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jan 17, 2017Background
- Lane pleaded guilty to first-degree child molestation and two counts of witness tampering; the State recommended a SSOSA suspended sentence with mandatory sex-offender treatment and strict conditions.
- Judgment imposed 82 months to life suspended, community custody, mandatory conditions (no contact with minors without approval, no alcohol/illegal drugs, polygraphs, approved residence/travel).
- Lane repeatedly violated conditions: contact with a minor in 2012 (and lied about it), positive methamphetamine test in Feb 2015 (and later denied drug use), and left Pierce County without permission in Aug 2015 (initially lied about it).
- Polygraph exams and CCO/treatment-provider testimony indicated deception and noncompliance; treatment provider stressed honesty as critical to amenability.
- Trial court initially imposed jail sanctions for earlier violations, later held a revocation hearing and revoked the SSOSA, finding a pattern of deception and that Lane was not amenable to treatment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether substantial evidence supports revocation for failing to make satisfactory progress in treatment | Lane: record lacks substantial evidence that he failed to make satisfactory progress before Sept 1, 2015 | State: repeated condition violations and documented deception show failure to make satisfactory progress and violate SSOSA terms | Court: Affirmed — substantial evidence supports finding Lane not amenable to treatment due to dishonesty and violations |
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking the SSOSA suspended sentence | Lane: revocation was excessive because treatment progress was sufficient and provider noted progress | State: revocation within court’s discretion given ongoing dishonesty undermining supervision and public safety | Court: No abuse of discretion — revocation is supported by the record and allowed under RCW 9.94A.670 |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. McCormick, 166 Wn.2d 689 (review standard for SSOSA revocation and abuse of discretion)
- State v. Miller, 180 Wn. App. 413 (standard for reviewing revocation and substantial evidence)
- State v. Ramirez, 140 Wn. App. 278 (court may revoke SSOSA for violation or failure to make satisfactory progress)
- State v. Sinclair, 192 Wn. App. 385 (factors relevant to postconviction relief considerations cited in opinion)