STATE v. PESOTSKIY, 52324-4-I (Wash.App. 10-11-2004)

STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. GEORGIY M. PESOTSKIY, Appellant.

No. 52324-4-I, Linked with No. 52502-6-IThe Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One.
Filed: October 11, 2004 UNPUBLISHED OPINION

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No. 02-1-00220-6. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 04/15/2003. Judge signing: Hon. Ronald Kessler.

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

Christopher Gibson, Attorney at Law, 1908 E Madison St, Seattle, WA 98122.

Pesotskiy — Informational only (Appearing Pro Se), Doc # 852577, Monroe Corr. Complex Tru, P.O. Box 888, Monroe, WA 98272-0888.

Counsel for Respondent(s), Prosecuting Atty King County, King County Prosecutor/appellate Unit, 1850 Key Tower, 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104.

Andrea Ruth Vitalich, King County Prosecutor’s Office, 516 3rd Ave Ste W554, Seattle, WA 98104-2362.

PER CURIAM.

Georgiy Pesotskiy appeals the sentences imposed following his convictions for two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor, one count of child molestation in the first degree, and one count of rape of a child in the first degree.[1] The trial court sentenced him to concurrent, standard range sentences totaling 279 months of confinement. Pesotskiy contends RCW 43.43.754 and the portion of his sentence requiring him to provide a biological sample for DNA identification violate his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches, and his privacy rights under Article 1, section 7 of the Washington Constitution. This decision is controlled by our decision in State v. Surge,[2] in which we rejected this argument.

In addition to this single issue in his appellate brief, Pesotskiy filed a statement of additional grounds for review. We are unable to address the matters he raises because it is written in a foreign language and there is no translation.

We affirm the Judgment and Sentence.

COX, ELLINGTON and AGID, JJ.

[1] The defendant was tried jointly with his wife and co-defendant, Nadezha Pesotskiy, who was convicted of one count of sexual exploitation of a minor. The cases have been linked for purposes of appeal.

[2] 122 Wn. App. 448, 94 P.3d 345 (2004) (holding that Fourth Amendment argument is controlled by State v. Olivas, 122 Wn.2d 73, 856 P.2d 1076 (1993), and rejecting argument based on the Washington Constitution and State v. Lucas, 56 Wn. App. 236, 783 P.2d 121
(1989)).