From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Drew

The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One
Feb 27, 1995
77 Wn. App. 1009 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995)

Opinion

No. 32953-7-I.

February 27, 1995.

[1] Criminal Law — Punishment — Sentence — Conditions — Community Placement — Crime Against Person — Determination. For purposes of RCW 9.94A.120(8)(a), which requires a term of community placement for any crime against a person committed while armed with a deadly weapon, the "crime against a person" element is satisfied if the facts of the particular case fall squarely within the commonsense meaning of that phrase.

Nature of Action: Prosecution for first degree rape, first degree robbery, and first degree burglary while armed with a deadly weapon.

Superior Court: The Superior Court for King County, No. 93-1-00947-6, John M. Darrah, J., entered a judgment of guilty of first degree burglary on June 3, 1993. The sentence included a term of community placement.

Court of Appeals: Holding that the burglary constituted a crime against a person, the court affirms the judgment.

Patricia Novotny of Washington Appellate Defender Association, for appellant.

Norm Maleng, Prosecuting Attorney, and James Whisman, Deputy, for respondent.


Robert Drew appeals from the judgment and sentence entered following his conviction for first degree burglary. A commissioner of this court referred the matter for accelerated review pursuant to RAP 18.12. We affirm.

The victim was Drew's former girlfriend. She testified he forced his way into her apartment, then over a 2-hour period beat, raped and threatened to kill her. He testified they participated in consensual sex and denied assaulting and raping her. Drew was charged with burglary in the first degree as follows: "[Defendant] did enter and remain unlawfully in the dwelling of [victim] . . . with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, and in entering, and while in such dwelling and in immediate flight therefrom, the defendant did assault [victim]." Drew was also charged with being armed with a deadly weapon during the commission of the offense. RCW 9A.52.020; RCW 9.94A.125.

Drew was convicted of these offenses and sentenced to a term of 36 months. The judgment and sentence imposed a term of community placement based on commission of a crime against a person while the defendant was armed with a deadly weapon. RCW 9.94A.120(8)(a).

Drew was also charged with first degree rape and first degree robbery but was not convicted of those charges.

Drew first challenges the authority of the trial court to impose a term of community placement for the crime of first degree burglary. The sentencing court must impose community placement for sex offenses, serious violent offenses, assault in the second degree, assault of a child in the second degree, certain enumerated drug offenses, and "any crime against a person where it is determined . . . that the defendant . . . was armed with a deadly weapon[.]" RCW 9.94A.120(8)(a).

Drew contends that first degree burglary is not included in any of the above categories. Specifically, he argues: "It is not a crime against a person, but a crime against property." He relies primarily on State v. Kisor, 68 Wn. App. 610, 844 P.2d 1038, review denied, 121 Wn.2d 1023 (1993). Drew asks this court to strike the community placement provision from the judgment and sentence.

[1] Research has not disclosed a definition of "crime against a person" in the criminal statutes. However, we agree with the State that the meaning of the phrase encompasses the instant crime. The victim testified that Drew assaulted her with a knife, beat her, and raped her. In order to convict on the burglary charge, the jury was instructed it had to find that Drew assaulted the victim. The facts of this case fall squarely within the common sense meaning of "crime against a person". We need not reach the broader issue of whether all first degree burglaries constitute such crimes.

Although the community placement statute provides no definition of "crime against a person", two other statutes related to crimes list burglary in the first degree as a crime against persons. RCW 9.94A.440 provides standards for guiding charging decisions of prosecutors. The statute lists first degree burglary as a crime against persons. Similarly, RCW 43.43.830(5), regarding disclosure by the Washington State Patrol of the criminal records of applicants for employment in certain service industries, categorizes first degree burglary as a "'[c]rime against children or other persons'".

State v. Kisor, supra, upon which Drew relies, also concerns a term of community placement for first degree burglary. This court struck down the community placement term. However, the State correctly points out that Kisor is distinguishable. In Kisor the defendant was convicted of first degree burglary, theft, and harming a police dog. The trial court ordered community placement without specifying which crime justified the sentence. Apparently, the State argued only that one or more of the offenses was a "serious violent offense". The court rejected this argument because neither first degree burglary, theft, nor harming a police dog is included in the category of serious violent offenses listed in RCW 9.94A.030(29). Concluding "there was no legal basis for the community placement order", the court set it aside. Kisor, 68 Wn. App. at 619.
The court in Kisor never addressed the particular argument raised here, that first degree burglary requires community placement under the prong of RCW 9.94A.120(8)(a) concerning crimes against a person where the defendant is armed with a deadly weapon. Furthermore, the decision does not reveal any facts suggesting that an assault or other violent crime was committed in that burglary. The case is distinguishable on this basis.

Since the remainder of this opinion has no precedential value, it will not be published. See RCW 2.06.040; CAR 14.


Summaries of

State v. Drew

The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One
Feb 27, 1995
77 Wn. App. 1009 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995)
Case details for

State v. Drew

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. ROBERT EVERETT DREW, Appellant

Court:The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One

Date published: Feb 27, 1995

Citations

77 Wn. App. 1009 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995)
77 Wn. App. 1009
77 Wash. App. 1009
77 Wash. App. 339

Citing Cases

State v. Barnett

In the context of the language and history of the statutory provisions it is clear the table in RCW 9.94A.440…

State v. Barnett

This case presents the "broader issue." State v. Drew, 77 Wn. App. 339, 891 P.2d 39 (1995).Drew, 77 Wn. App.…