State v. Barber
248 P.3d 494
Wash.2011Background
- Barber pleads guilty to felony DUI under a plea agreement with a State recommendation of 51 months to run concurrently, but the plea form did not note any community custody term.
- The court summarized the agreement noting a 7-point offender score and an intended 51-month term with concurrent sentencing, but defense counsel indicated uncertainty about community custody.
- The State later recommended 51 months and concurrent sentences at sentencing, and the court imposed 51 months with no mention of community custody at that time.
- Six months after sentencing, the Department of Corrections informed that felony DUI carried a mandatory 9 to 18 months of community custody; the State moved to amend, and Barber elected specific performance.
- The trial court held it was not bound by the State’s recommendation, and resentencing imposed the statutory community custody term; Barber challenged the remedy sought.
- Court overruled Miller to hold that specific performance cannot bind the court to an illegal sentence in mutual-mistake contexts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Miller allows specific performance to enforce an illegal sentence. | Barber argues Miller entitles specific performance to an illegal term. | State argues Miller is correct that specific performance can enforce an illegal sentence. | No; Miller is overruled to the extent it allows this. |
| Is specific performance available where mutual mistake leads to a sentence contrary to law? | Barber relies on mutual-mistake rationale. | State contends specific performance should extend to mutual mistake. | Not available; remedy limited to withdrawal of plea. |
| What remedy should apply in mutual-mistake cases regarding illegal sentences? | Barber seeks specific performance. | State seeks performance of sentence via court enforcement. | Withdrawal of plea is the proper remedy. |
| Does Miller’s rule threaten SRA goals or separation of powers? | N/A | N/A | Miller is harmful; overruling required to preserve SRA aims and separation of powers. |
Key Cases Cited
- Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (U.S. 1971) (breach remedies in plea bargains; specific performance or withdrawal allowed)
- State v. Miller, 110 Wash.2d 528 (Wash. 1988) (extended Santobello to mutual mistake; allowed enforcement of illegal sentence)
- Cosner v. State, 85 Wash.2d 45 (Wash. 1965) (due process and sentencing enhancements; misreading led to improper enforcement)
- State v. Tourtellotte, 88 Wash.2d 579 (Wash. 1977) (breach remedy; specific performance within breach context)
- In re Pers. Restraint of Williams, 96 Wash.2d 847 (Wash. 1982) (context on enforcement of plea terms against statutory constraints)