Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE

No. 63094-6-I/2

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

) ) )

No. 63094-6-I

Respondent,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PUBLISH

v. ) CALVIN ELIJAH WILLIAMS, ) ) )

Appellant.

) ) ) )

The respondent, State of Washington, having filed its motion to publish and appellant, Calvin Williams, having filed his response herein and a panel of the court having reconsidered its prior determination not to publish the opinion filed for the above entitled matter on August 2, 2010 and finding that it is of precedential value and should

2

No. 63094-6-I/3

be published. Now, therefore it is hereby ORDERED that the opinion filed August 2, 2010 shall be published and printed in the Washington Appellate Reports. DATED this day of September, 2010.

Judge

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. CALVIN ELIJAH WILLIAMS, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 63094-6-I DIVISION ONE PUBLISHED OPINION

FILED: August 2, 2010

Appelwick, J. -- This appeal presents a single issue: whether a court may prohibit a defendant from unsupervised contact with minors as a condition of a sentence for failure to register as a sex offender. Finding no error, we affirm. FACTS Because Calvin Williams had a conviction for rape of a child in the third degree and was homeless, he was required to report weekly to the King County Sheriff's

3

No. 63094-6-I/4

Office. When he failed to report, the State charged him with failure to register as a sex offender contrary to RCW 9A.44.130(11)(a). The jury found him guilty as charged. The trial court sentenced Williams to 57 months. The court also ordered Williams to have no unsupervised contact with minors for five years. Williams did not object. Williams appeals the trial court's imposition of the condition prohibiting unsupervised contact with minors. DISCUSSION We review the imposition of crime-related prohibitions for an abuse of discretion. State v. Ancira, 107 Wn. App. 650, 653, 27 P.3d 1246 (2001). We will reverse only if the decision is manifestly unreasonable or based on untenable grounds. State v. Riley, 121 Wn.2d 22, 37, 846 P.2d 1365 (1993); State v. Cunningham, 96 Wn.2d 31, 34, 633 P.2d 886 (1981). Williams challenges the court's imposition of a five-year prohibition against unsupervised contact with minors. He argues that this condition is not directly related to the crime of failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(8). We disagree. The trial court entered the prohibition regarding contact with minors as a condition of Williams's sentence for failing to register as a sex offender. RCW

9.94A.505(8) provides: "As part of any sentence, the court may impose and enforce crime related prohibitions and affirmative conditions as provided in this chapter." Crime related prohibitions are defined as "an order of a court prohibiting conduct that directly relates to the circumstances of the crime for which the offender has been convicted."

4

No. 63094-6-I/5

Former RCW 9.94A.030(13) (2007). The existence of a relationship between the crime and the condition "`will always be subjective, and such issues have traditionally been left to the discretion of the sentencing judge.'" State v. Parramore, 53 Wn. App. 527, 530, 768 P.2d 530 (1989) (quoting David Boerner, Sentencing in Washington,

Download 63094-6-cor-doc.pdf

Washington Law