Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Resentencing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel considers narrow fix to resentencing for some exceptional pleas tied to robbery-2 changes
Summary
House Bill 1229 would require resentencing in cases where a defendant accepted an exceptional sentence via plea to avoid a persistent-offender designation based in part on robbery in the second degree; advocates called it a small technical fix for people left behind by earlier statutory changes, while prosecutors raised capacity and eligibility
Staff told the committee House Bill 1229 would require resentencing for people who entered plea agreements to exceptional sentences to avoid persistent-offender designations where a robbery in the second degree conviction was used as one basis for the persistent-offender finding. The staff briefing explained that robbery in the second degree had been removed from the statutory list of "most serious offenses" in 2019 and that subsequent legislation in 2021 required county prosecutors to review and seek relief in some cases.
Advocates, including Jacob Schmidt of Justice Solutions and Cindy Ahrens of the Washington Defender Association, described the bill as a narrowly targeted technical fix for a small group of people who were effectively left behind by prior reforms. Jacob Schmidt said the bill grew out of individual casework and noted Pierce County had resentenced one person under a related mechanism. He argued the people affected chose plea deals that avoided more severe consequences and that fairness required providing a pathway to resentencing.
Prosecutors warned of practical capacity problems. Russell Brown, executive director of the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, said many counties currently lack capacity to file new serious felony charges and that widespread resentencings would compete for scarce prosecutor and court resources. Brown asked for case-level data to identify eligible files. The Office of Public Defense and the director of public defense said case-identification and limited resentencing work could be performed but that staffing and paralegal work would be needed to gather records.
The committee asked sponsors and stakeholders to continue discussions; no vote was taken during the hearing.
