State Of Washington v. Robert Allen Kinney, 47867-6

Robert Kinney was charged with first-degree child rape; trial set for March 2015. The State offered an amended information and Kinney entered an Alford plea to first-degree child molestation on March 19, 2015.
Prior to plea and trial, Kinney repeatedly vacillated among requests to represent himself and to be represented by appointed counsel; judges engaged in multiple colloquies. He ultimately proceeded with counsel at trial and then entered the plea.
After plea but before sentencing, Kinney sought to withdraw his plea. The trial court denied his CrR 4.2(f) motion following a hearing.
At sentencing the court imposed discretionary legal financial obligations (LFOs), including court-appointed attorney fees and a finding that Kinney had the present ability to pay incarceration costs; the court noted Kinney received Social Security disability.
Kinney appealed, arguing (1) the trial court’s handling of his intermittent self-representation requests rendered his Alford plea involuntary, and (2) the court failed to make the individualized ability-to-pay inquiry required before imposing discretionary LFOs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court’s handling of Kinney’s self-representation requests rendered his guilty plea involuntary	Kinney: judges denied or undermined his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation, so plea was not voluntary	State: requests were equivocal and withdrawn; courts appropriately conducted colloquies and reappointed counsel	Court held no violation; requests were equivocal or withdrawn, so plea voluntary and denial of motion to withdraw not an abuse of discretion
Whether the trial court made the required individualized inquiry into ability to pay before imposing discretionary LFOs and incarceration costs	Kinney: court failed to probe work history, debts, disability, and future earning capacity; Social Security generally unavailable during incarceration	State: court’s statements and findings were sufficient	Court held inquiry insufficient under Blazina/Leonard; remanded for reconsideration of discretionary LFOs and incarceration costs
Whether appellate costs waiver must be raised in opening brief	Kinney: issue need not be raised until State files a cost bill	State: argued otherwise per Division One authority	Court followed Division Two precedent (Grant): waiver can be raised later; not required in opening brief

State v. Madsen, 168 Wn.2d 496 (2010) (describing right to self-representation and requirement that request be unequivocal and timely)
State v. Coley, 180 Wn.2d 543 (2014) (unequivocal and timely invocation required; review for abuse of discretion)
State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827 (2015) (trial court must make individualized inquiry into present and future ability to pay before imposing discretionary LFOs)
State v. Leonard, 184 Wn.2d 505 (2015) (inmate incarceration costs are discretionary and require ability-to-pay inquiry)
State v. Robinson, 172 Wn.2d 783 (2011) (guilty plea must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary; CrR 4.2(d) safeguards)
State v. Stenson, 132 Wn.2d 668 (1997) (explaining why unequivocal waiver protects against manipulative vacillation)