State v. Bluehorse
248 P.3d 537
| Wash. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- OLCK a Crips offshoot involved in a July 5, 2007 drive-by shooting injuring Pritchard; bystander heard a drive-by and Crip-tinged terms were used.
- Bluehorse was identified as a shooter by bystander and by Fomai and Francis Leoso, with gang-related testimony linking OLCK and NGC.
- August 23, 2007 information charged Bluehorse with two drive-by counts with gang aggravators; jury convicted on the July 5 count and found a gang aggravator.
- The trial court sentenced Bluehorse to 108 months but did not enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting the exceptional sentence.
- On appeal, the court affirmed the conviction, reversed the gang aggravator due to insufficiency of evidence, vacated the exceptional sentence for due process concerns under the real facts doctrine, and remanded for resentencing within the standard range.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by not entering written findings and conclusions. | Bluehorse argues mandatory findings were required. | State concedes error but urges remand unnecessary. | Error but no remand; oral ruling sufficient for review. |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the gang aggravator finding. | Substantial evidence supports gang motive to obtain/maintain status. | Evidence insufficient to show motive tied to gang membership. | Gang aggravator not supported; reversed. |
| Whether the reasons for the exceptional sentence complied with the real facts doctrine. | Trial court relied on first-degree assault facts not charged. | Reasons substantial and compelling under statute. | Real facts doctrine violated; cannot justify sentence. |
| Whether the exceptional sentence was clearly excessive. | Sentence necessary to reflect bystander danger and gang impact. | Sentence within permissible range given circumstances. | Clearly excessive; vacate and remand for standard-range sentence. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hale, 146 Wash.App. 299 (Wash.App. 2008) (standard for reviewing exceptional sentences and harmless error.)
- State v. Jeannotte, 133 Wash.2d 847 (Wash. 1997) (substantial evidence standard for aggravating factors.)
- State v. Wakefield, 130 Wash.2d 464 (Wash. 1996) (real facts doctrine prohibition on using element-equivalent facts.)
- State v. Johnson, 124 Wash.2d 57 (Wash. 1994) (gang-related aggravators and community impact as permissible factors.)
- State v. Smith, 64 Wash. App. 620 (Wash. App. 1992) (furtherance of a criminal enterprise as a basis for extraordinary sentence.)
- State v. Yarbrough, 151 Wash.App. 66 (Wash. App. 2009) (evidence of intent to obtain/maintain gang membership supporting aggravator.)
- State v. Monschke, 133 Wash.App. 313 (Wash. App. 2006) (murder to advance position in a white supremacist group.)
- State v. Thein, 138 Wash.2d 133 (Wash. 1999) (rejects generalized police assertions as basis for probable cause; relevant to limits on gang evidence.)
- State v. Riley, 69 Wash.App. 349 (Wash. App. 1993) (gang-related factors must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.)