State Supreme Court hears challenge over refund and vacatur for drug‑court participant after Blake decision

The Washington State Supreme Court on Feb. 24 heard arguments in State of Washington v. Karen Kathleen Peterson over whether a person who entered drug‑court diversion and later had the underlying statute declared unconstitutional can use Criminal Rule 7.8 to vacate a charge and secure reimbursement of fees.

Willa Osborne, representing Peterson for the Washington Appellate Project, told the court that Peterson ‘‘paid $900 and entered drug treatment court’’ and, after more than a year in the program, ‘‘earned the dismissal of that charge.’’ Osborne said the court's decision in Blake, which found the statute unconstitutional, entitles people like Peterson to relief and that a trial‑court order of vacatur is the practical mechanism to trigger refunds administered under the state's Blake refund process.

Osborne asked the justices to treat the drug‑court outcome as a proceeding from which relief should flow under CR 7.8, arguing in part that the Blake refund mechanism and administrative practice require an order of vacatur to effectuate reimbursement. ‘‘The real value of an order of vacatur in this case is to effectuate the refund,’’ she said, adding that…