STATE v. HARRISON, 52878-5-I (Wash.App. 9-8-2004)

No. 52878-5-IThe Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One.
Filed: September 8, 2004 UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No: 03-1-06977-5. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 07/21/2003. Judge signing: Hon. Steven C Gonzalez.

Counsel for Appellant(s), Nielsen Broman Koch Pllc, Attorney at Law, 1908 E Madison St, Seattle, WA 98122.

Counsel for Respondent(s), E Bradford Bales, King Co Pros Aty Ofc, 516 3rd Ave, Seattle, WA 98104-2390.

Prosecuting Atty King County, King County Prosecutor/appellate Unit, 1850 Key Tower, 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104.

PER CURIAM.

Gentris Harrison challenges the inclusion in his offender score of a juvenile adjudication that had previously `washed out.’ This argument is foreclosed by State v. Varga, 151 Wn.2d 179, 86 P.3d 139 (2004). We affirm.

In June, 2003, Harrison was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree. He subsequently pleaded guilty. The State asserted that Harrison had an offender score of two points, which included a 1994 juvenile offense committed before Harrison was 15 years old. With a score of two points, Harrison’s standard range was 4 to 12 months in custody. The defense argued at sentencing that the juvenile adjudication should not have been included, reducing his offender score to one point and a standard range of 3 to 8 months. The sentencing court imposed a sentence of six months.

In 1997 and 2002, the legislature amended the Sentencing Reform Act to eliminate the `wash out’ provisions upon which Harrison relies. The Supreme Court in Varga addressed the question of whether the 2002 amendments could `require that sentencing courts include previously `washed out’ prior convictions when determining defendants’ criminal histories and offender scores for crimes committed after the amendments’ effective date.’ Varga, 151 Wn.2d at 183. The court held that because the amendments were prospective, a defendant does not have a vested right in the `washed out’ status of a prior conviction. Id. at 195. Harrison’s current offense was committed in June, 2003, well after the effective date of the amendments. The 2002 amendments thus apply to the calculation of Harrison’s offender score. The sentencing court properly included Harrison’s juvenile adjudication in his offender score.

We affirm.