Personal Restraint Petition Of Dominique Shavies ( 2021 )

Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
May 18, 2021
DIVISION II
In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of
No. 54732-5-II (consolidated
DOMINIQUE SHAVIES, with No. 54952-2-II)
Petitioner.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
GLASGOW, J.—Dominique Shavies seeks relief from personal restraint imposed
following his 2009 conviction for first degree robbery and his 2018 pleas of guilty to
unlawful possession of methamphetamine and unlawful possession of cocaine. He filed
petitions arguing that the Department of Corrections had miscalculated his earned release
date on the robbery sentence and that his unlawful possession sentences should run
concurrently with his robbery sentence.
While his petitions were pending, the Washington Supreme Court issued its
decision in State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170, 481 P.3d 521 (2021). In Blake, the Supreme
Court held that Washington’s strict liability drug possession statute, RCW 69.50.4013(1),
violates state and federal due process clauses and therefore is void. 197 Wn.2d at 182-83,
186. The State now concedes that under Blake, Shavies is entitled to have his 2018
convictions for unlawful possession vacated and to have his 2009 conviction remanded to
the trial court because his criminal history for that judgment and sentence contains prior
convictions for unlawful possession. We agree.
This relief renders the remainder of Shavies’ petitions moot. Accordingly, we
remand for the trial court to vacate Shavies’ 2018 convictions for unlawful possession of a
Nos. 54732-5-II and 54952-2-II
controlled substance. The trial court must also correct his 2009 judgment and sentence,
recalculate Shavies’ offender score for his 2009 conviction, and resentence him. We
dismiss the remainder of his petitions as moot and deny his request for appointment of
counsel. In light of this decision, we also deny the Department of Corrections’ motion to
stay.
A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the
Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW
2.06.040, it is so ordered.
Glasgow, J.
We concur:
Lee, C.J.
Sutton, J.
2