BILL REQ. #: H-1325.1
State of Washington | 63rd Legislature | 2013 Regular Session |
READ FIRST TIME 02/11/13.
AN ACT Relating to sentences involving aggravating circumstances; amending RCW 9.94A.537 and 9.94A.535; and prescribing penalties.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1 RCW 9.94A.537 and 2007 c 205 s 2 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) At any time prior to trial or entry of the guilty plea if
substantial rights of the defendant are not prejudiced, the state may
give notice that it is seeking a sentence above the standard sentencing
range. The notice shall state aggravating circumstances upon which the
requested sentence will be based.
(2) In any case where an exceptional sentence above the standard
range was imposed and where a new sentencing hearing is required, the
superior court may impanel a jury to consider any alleged aggravating
circumstances listed in RCW 9.94A.535(3), that were relied upon by the
superior court in imposing the previous sentence, at the new sentencing
hearing.
(3) The facts supporting aggravating circumstances shall be proved
to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury's verdict on the
aggravating factor must be unanimous, and by special interrogatory. If
a jury is waived, proof shall be to the court beyond a reasonable
doubt, unless the defendant stipulates to the aggravating facts.
(4) Evidence regarding any facts supporting aggravating
circumstances under RCW 9.94A.535(3) (((a) through (y))) shall be
presented to the jury during the trial of the alleged crime, unless the
jury has been impaneled solely for resentencing, or unless the state
alleges the aggravating circumstances listed in RCW 9.94A.535(3)
(e)(iv), (h)(i), (o), or (t). If one of these aggravating
circumstances is alleged, the trial court may conduct a separate
proceeding if the evidence supporting the aggravating fact is not part
of the res geste of the charged crime, if the evidence is not otherwise
admissible in trial of the charged crime, and if the court finds that
the probative value of the evidence to the aggravated fact is
substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect on the jury's
ability to determine guilt or innocence for the underlying crime.
(5) If the superior court conducts a separate proceeding to
determine the existence of aggravating circumstances listed in RCW
9.94A.535(3) (e)(iv), (h)(i), (o), or (t), the proceeding shall
immediately follow the trial on the underlying conviction, if possible.
If any person who served on the jury is unable to continue, the court
shall substitute an alternate juror.
(6) If the jury finds, unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt,
one or more of the facts alleged by the state in support of an
aggravated sentence, the court may sentence the offender pursuant to
RCW 9.94A.535 to a term of confinement up to the maximum allowed under
RCW 9A.20.021 for the underlying conviction if it finds, considering
the purposes of this chapter, that the facts found are substantial and
compelling reasons justifying an exceptional sentence.
Sec. 2 RCW 9.94A.535 and 2011 c 87 s 1 are each amended to read
as follows:
The court may impose a sentence outside the standard sentence range
for an offense if it finds, considering the purpose of this chapter,
that there are substantial and compelling reasons justifying an
exceptional sentence. Facts supporting aggravated sentences, other
than the fact of a prior conviction, shall be determined pursuant to
the provisions of RCW 9.94A.537.
Whenever a sentence outside the standard sentence range is imposed,
the court shall set forth the reasons for its decision in written
findings of fact and conclusions of law. A sentence outside the
standard sentence range shall be a determinate sentence.
If the sentencing court finds that an exceptional sentence outside
the standard sentence range should be imposed, the sentence is subject
to review only as provided for in RCW 9.94A.585(4).
A departure from the standards in RCW 9.94A.589 (1) and (2)
governing whether sentences are to be served consecutively or
concurrently is an exceptional sentence subject to the limitations in
this section, and may be appealed by the offender or the state as set
forth in RCW 9.94A.585 (2) through (6).
(1) Mitigating Circumstances - Court to Consider
The court may impose an exceptional sentence below the standard
range if it finds that mitigating circumstances are established by a
preponderance of the evidence. The following are illustrative only and
are not intended to be exclusive reasons for exceptional sentences.
(a) To a significant degree, the victim was an initiator, willing
participant, aggressor, or provoker of the incident.
(b) Before detection, the defendant compensated, or made a good
faith effort to compensate, the victim of the criminal conduct for any
damage or injury sustained.
(c) The defendant committed the crime under duress, coercion,
threat, or compulsion insufficient to constitute a complete defense but
which significantly affected his or her conduct.
(d) The defendant, with no apparent predisposition to do so, was
induced by others to participate in the crime.
(e) The defendant's capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his
or her conduct, or to conform his or her conduct to the requirements of
the law, was significantly impaired. Voluntary use of drugs or alcohol
is excluded.
(f) The offense was principally accomplished by another person and
the defendant manifested extreme caution or sincere concern for the
safety or well-being of the victim.
(g) The operation of the multiple offense policy of RCW 9.94A.589
results in a presumptive sentence that is clearly excessive in light of
the purpose of this chapter, as expressed in RCW 9.94A.010.
(h) The defendant or the defendant's children suffered a continuing
pattern of physical or sexual abuse by the victim of the offense and
the offense is a response to that abuse.
(i) The defendant was making a good faith effort to obtain or
provide medical assistance for someone who is experiencing a drug-related overdose.
(j) The current offense involved domestic violence, as defined in
RCW 10.99.020, and the defendant suffered a continuing pattern of
coercion, control, or abuse by the victim of the offense and the
offense is a response to that coercion, control, or abuse.
(2) Aggravating Circumstances - Considered and Imposed by the Court
The trial court may impose an aggravated exceptional sentence
without a finding of fact by a jury under the following circumstances:
(a) The defendant and the state both stipulate that justice is best
served by the imposition of an exceptional sentence outside the
standard range, and the court finds the exceptional sentence to be
consistent with and in furtherance of the interests of justice and the
purposes of the sentencing reform act.
(b) The ((defendant's)) defendant has three or more prior unscored
misdemeanor or prior unscored foreign criminal ((history results in a
presumptive sentence that is clearly too lenient in light of the
purpose of this chapter, as expressed in RCW 9.94A.010)) convictions
for acts similar to the current offense.
(c) The defendant has committed multiple current offenses and the
defendant's high offender score results in some of the current offenses
going unpunished.
(d) The ((failure to consider the defendant's)) defendant has three
or more prior criminal ((history which was)) convictions that were
omitted from the offender score calculation pursuant to RCW 9.94A.525
((results in a presumptive sentence that is clearly too lenient)).
(3) Aggravating Circumstances - Considered by a Jury - Imposed by
the Court
Except for circumstances listed in subsection (2) of this section,
the following circumstances are an exclusive list of factors that can
support a sentence above the standard range. Such facts should be
determined by procedures specified in RCW 9.94A.537.
(a) The defendant's conduct during the commission of the current
offense manifested deliberate cruelty to the victim.
(b) The defendant knew or should have known that the victim of the
current offense was particularly vulnerable or incapable of resistance.
(c) The current offense was a violent offense, and the defendant
knew that the victim of the current offense was pregnant.
(d) The current offense was a major economic offense or series of
offenses, so identified by a consideration of any of the following
factors:
(i) The current offense involved multiple victims or multiple
incidents per victim;
(ii) The current offense involved attempted or actual monetary loss
substantially greater than typical for the offense;
(iii) The current offense involved a high degree of sophistication
or planning or occurred over a lengthy period of time; or
(iv) The defendant used his or her position of trust, confidence,
or fiduciary responsibility to facilitate the commission of the current
offense.
(e) The current offense was a major violation of the Uniform
Controlled Substances Act, chapter 69.50 RCW (VUCSA), related to
trafficking in controlled substances, which was more onerous than the
typical offense of its statutory definition: The presence of ANY of
the following may identify a current offense as a major VUCSA:
(i) The current offense involved at least three separate
transactions in which controlled substances were sold, transferred, or
possessed with intent to do so;
(ii) The current offense involved an attempted or actual sale or
transfer of controlled substances in quantities substantially larger
than for personal use;
(iii) The current offense involved the manufacture of controlled
substances for use by other parties;
(iv) The circumstances of the current offense reveal the offender
to have occupied a high position in the drug distribution hierarchy;
(v) The current offense involved a high degree of sophistication or
planning, occurred over a lengthy period of time, or involved a broad
geographic area of disbursement; or
(vi) The offender used his or her position or status to facilitate
the commission of the current offense, including positions of trust,
confidence or fiduciary responsibility (e.g., pharmacist, physician, or
other medical professional).
(f) The current offense included a finding of sexual motivation
pursuant to RCW 9.94A.835.
(g) The offense was part of an ongoing pattern of sexual abuse of
the same victim under the age of eighteen years manifested by multiple
incidents over a prolonged period of time.
(h) The current offense involved domestic violence, as defined in
RCW 10.99.020, and one or more of the following was present:
(i) The offense was part of an ongoing pattern of psychological,
physical, or sexual abuse of a victim or multiple victims manifested by
multiple incidents over a prolonged period of time;
(ii) The offense occurred within sight or sound of the victim's or
the offender's minor children under the age of eighteen years; or
(iii) The offender's conduct during the commission of the current
offense manifested deliberate cruelty or intimidation of the victim.
(i) The offense resulted in the pregnancy of a child victim of
rape.
(j) The defendant knew that the victim of the current offense was
a youth who was not residing with a legal custodian and the defendant
established or promoted the relationship for the primary purpose of
victimization.
(k) The offense was committed with the intent to obstruct or impair
human or animal health care or agricultural or forestry research or
commercial production.
(l) The current offense is trafficking in the first degree or
trafficking in the second degree and any victim was a minor at the time
of the offense.
(m) The offense involved a high degree of sophistication or
planning.
(n) The defendant used his or her position of trust, confidence, or
fiduciary responsibility to facilitate the commission of the current
offense.
(o) The defendant committed a current sex offense, has a history of
sex offenses, and is not amenable to treatment.
(p) The offense involved an invasion of the victim's privacy.
(q) The defendant demonstrated or displayed an egregious lack of
remorse.
(r) The offense involved a destructive and foreseeable impact on
persons other than the victim.
(s) The defendant committed the offense to obtain or maintain his
or her membership or to advance his or her position in the hierarchy of
an organization, association, or identifiable group.
(t) The defendant committed the current offense shortly after being
released from incarceration.
(u) The current offense is a burglary and the victim of the
burglary was present in the building or residence when the crime was
committed.
(v) The offense was committed against a law enforcement officer who
was performing his or her official duties at the time of the offense,
the offender knew that the victim was a law enforcement officer, and
the victim's status as a law enforcement officer is not an element of
the offense.
(w) The defendant committed the offense against a victim who was
acting as a good samaritan.
(x) The defendant committed the offense against a public official
or officer of the court in retaliation of the public official's
performance of his or her duty to the criminal justice system.
(y) The victim's injuries substantially exceed the level of bodily
harm necessary to satisfy the elements of the offense. This aggravator
is not an exception to RCW 9.94A.530(2).
(z)(i)(A) The current offense is theft in the first degree, theft
in the second degree, possession of stolen property in the first
degree, or possession of stolen property in the second degree; (B) the
stolen property involved is metal property; and (C) the property damage
to the victim caused in the course of the theft of metal property is
more than three times the value of the stolen metal property, or the
theft of the metal property creates a public hazard.
(ii) For purposes of this subsection, "metal property" means
commercial metal property, private metal property, or nonferrous metal
property, as defined in RCW 19.290.010.
(aa) The defendant committed the offense with the intent to
directly or indirectly cause any benefit, aggrandizement, gain, profit,
or other advantage to or for a criminal street gang as defined in RCW
9.94A.030, its reputation, influence, or membership.
(bb) The current offense involved paying to view, over the internet
in violation of RCW 9.68A.075, depictions of a minor engaged in an act
of sexually explicit conduct as defined in RCW 9.68A.011(4) (a) through
(g).
(cc) The offense was intentionally committed because the defendant
perceived the victim to be homeless, as defined in RCW 9.94A.030.