256 P.3d 285
Wash.2011Background
- Sims pled guilty to one count of first-degree child molestation for an incident involving an 11-year-old girl.
- The Department of Corrections recommended and Sims requested a SSOSA sentence.
- The trial court granted SSOSA but imposed a lifetime banishment from Cowlitz County, extending beyond Castle Rock, to be in effect if SSOSA was granted.
- The State and victim's family opposed SSOSA due to victim protection concerns; the court tied the gift of SSOSA to the geographic banishment.
- Sims appealed only the challenged geographic condition; the State conceded the condition was unconstitutional and sought broader remand for SSOSA reconsideration.
- The Court of Appeals remanded for full resentencing, prompting review by the Washington Supreme Court to determine the proper remand scope.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of remand when a sentencing condition is unconstitutional | Sims | State | Remand limited to revising the unconstitutional condition |
| Whether the State's request constitutes affirmative relief requiring cross appeal | State seeks to revoke SSOSA entirely | Sims | Yes, constitutes affirmative relief requiring cross appeal unless necessaries justify otherwise |
| Necessities of the case to permit affirmative relief | State | Sims | Necessities do not require affirmative relief; narrowly tailor the condition instead |
| Whether the SSOSA can be considered separately from the challenged condition | State | Sims | The sentencing condition and SSOSA are separable for remand purposes |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Osman, 157 Wash.2d 474 (2006) (discretionary SSOSA decisions; impermissible bases for denial)
- City of Seattle v. Marshall, 54 Wash.App. 829 (1989) (necessities of RAP 2.4(a) in cross-review context)
- Caritas Services, Inc. v. Department of Social & Health Services, 123 Wash.2d 391 (1994) (necessities of case and severability; cautious extension of relief)
- State v. Badger, 64 Wash.App. 904 (1992) (remand to exercise discretion where improper reliance on factors occurred)
- State v. Goss, 56 Wash.App. 541 (1990) (remand with instructions to correct SSOSA conditions)
- State v. McInally, 125 Wash.App. 854 (2005) (cross-appeal not always required for affirming grounds)
- State v. Bahl, 164 Wash.2d 739 (2008) (appeals and challenges to sentencing; first-time objections permitted)