State v. Bluehorse
248 P.3d 537
| Wash. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Bluehorse was convicted of July 5 drive-by shooting with a gang aggravator in a trial involving OLCK and NGC conflicts.
- The shooting injured Ibbha Pritchard (leg) near a residence where bystanders were present, including family members.
- Bluehorse was identified by witnesses as the shooter; a bystander described a Crip-associated verbal cue before the shot.
- Francis Leoso testified about OLCK/NGC gang tensions and Bluehorse's past blue attire and gang signaling.
- The State sought an exceptional sentence; the court imposed 108 months but did not enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law.
- The jury found the gang aggravator but Bluehorse challenged the sentence; the court’s reasons relied in part on general gang-characterizations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by not issuing written findings | Bluehorse: failure to enter findings violated RCW 9.94A.535 | State: written findings unnecessary; jury verdict supports the sentence implicitly | Harmless error; no remand needed |
| Whether the gang aggravator is supported by substantial evidence | Bluehorse: evidence insufficient to show motive to obtain/maintain gang status | State: evidence shows gang context and retaliation raising status concerns | Not supported; gang aggravator reversed |
| Whether the reasons for the exceptional sentence were substantial and compelling | Bluehorse: real facts doctrine violated; relied on uncharged first-degree assault | State: reasons adequate under the doctrine; community impact arguable | Violated real facts doctrine; reasons not substantial and compelling |
| Whether the sentence is clearly excessive given the record | Bluehorse: length based on uncharged offense and parity with codefendant | State: not argued on summary; argue general proportionality | Excessive; vacated and remanded for standard-range resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hale, 146 Wash. App. 299, 189 P.3d 829 ((2008)) (mandatory written findings for exceptional sentences; harmless error analysis)
- State v. Wakefield, 130 Wash.2d 464, 925 P.2d 183 ((1996)) (real facts doctrine: cannot rely on charged-uncharged element facts)
- State v. Johnson, 124 Wash.2d 57, 873 P.2d 514 ((1994)) (community impact and gang-related aggravators under older framework)
- State v. Smith, 64 Wash. App. 620, 825 P.2d 741 ((1992)) (furtherance of a criminal enterprise as a gang-based aggravator)
- State v. Yarbrough, 151 Wash.App. 66, 210 P.3d 1029 ((2009)) (evidence supporting gang aggravator under RCW 9.94A.535(3)(s))
- State v. Monschke, 133 Wash.App. 313, 135 P.3d 966 ((2006)) (gang-related aggravator evidence to advance status; white supremacist context)
- State v. Thein, 138 Wash.2d 133, 977 P.2d 582 ((1999)) (limits of generalized gang testimony; probative nexus requirements)
- State v. Riley, 69 Wash.App. 349, 848 P.2d 1288 ((1993)) (gang membership alone not enough for exceptional sentence)