State Of Washington v. Cory D. Reed ( 2017 )

Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
September 26, 2017
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION II
STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 49149-4-II
Respondent,
v.
CORY DANIEL REED, UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appellant.
LEE, J. — Cory Daniel Reed appeals his first degree robbery conviction and his deadly
weapon sentence enhancement. He contends that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient
to prove that he was armed with a deadly weapon to support the sentence enhancement. Reed
further contends the State failed to provide proof of his prior convictions for sentencing purposes.
In his statement of additional grounds for review (SAG), Reed alleges ineffective assistance of
counsel, violation of his public trial right, and prosecutorial misconduct. Because Reed waived
his right to appeal, we dismiss this appeal and all challenges raised in the SAG.
FACTS
While David Bonilla was walking home from work, he observed Reed coming towards
him from across the street. Bonilla and Reed were acquaintances with mutual friends. Bonilla
observed that Reed was walking very fast with a bat in his right hand. As Reed approached Bonilla,
he asked Bonilla if he had any money. When Bonilla told him he had no money, Reed responded,
“[W]ell, let me find out.” 1 Report of Proceedings (RP) at 136. Reed then put his left hand in
Bonilla’s pocket while holding the bat with his right hand. Bonilla asked Reed what he was doing
No. 49149-4-II
and Reed said, “This is a robbery in progress.” 1 RP at 138. Reed took two Elvis Presley
memorabilia coins from Bonilla’s pocket. Bonilla then ran to a nearby house and called the police.
The State charged Reed with one count of first degree robbery with a deadly weapon
sentencing enhancement, alleging that Reed “was armed with a deadly weapon other than a
firearm.” Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 54.
The jury found Reed guilty of first degree robbery. The jury also found that Reed was
armed with a deadly weapon at the time of the crime
Reed had two other pending cases at the time of his robbery conviction: Cause no.
15-1-01436-3 (possession of a stolen vehicle and first degree trafficking in stolen property) and
cause no. 16-1-00372-6 (possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine). Prior to
sentencing on the first degree robbery conviction, the State made a combined plea offer to resolve
Reed’s two pending cases and the first degree robbery conviction. In the combined plea offer,
Reed agreed to plead guilty to his other two pending cases in exchange for the State agreeing to
recommend not increasing Reed’s offender score and asking for a low end sentence of 81 months
for the first degree robbery conviction. The State’s combined plea offer stated:
[Reed] agrees that the Prosecutor’s Statement of the Defendant’s
Criminal History is accurate and that all out-of-state convictions
used to calculate the offender score are the equivalent of
Washington felonies. . . .
[Reed] agrees that his/her offender score is 5 FOR CASE 16-1-
00244-4 [first degree robbery case] and standard range is I: 57-75
MONTHS FOR CASE 16-1-00244-4 [first degree robbery case],
FOR ALL OTHER CHARGES 0-364 DAYS.
CP at 77. Reed accepted the State’s plea offer by signing the combined plea offer. Reed also
signed a waiver of the right to appeal his first degree robbery with a deadly weapon enhancement
2
No. 49149-4-II
conviction because he was receiving a favorable sentencing recommendation in not only the first
degree robbery case, but also in his other two pending cases. The trial court reviewed the
consequences of Reed’s waiver on the record, and Reed stated that he understood and that the
waiver was in his own best interest.
At sentencing, defense counsel told the sentencing court, “I’d ask the court to follow the
recommendation.” 2 RP at 345. The sentencing court calculated Reed’s offender score as 5 based
on the State’s statement of criminal history. The statement listed four prior convictions. The
sentencing court imposed a 57-month standard range sentence and 24-months for the deadly
weapon enhancement, for a total of 81 months. The sentencing court ran Reed’s first degree
robbery sentence concurrently with the sentences on cause no. 15-1-01436-3 and cause no. 16-1-
00372-6. Although Reed waived his right to appeal, he nevertheless appeals.
ANALYSIS
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Given the record, we address whether Reed waived his right to appeal. We hold that Reed’s
signed waiver relinquished his right to appeal his first degree robbery conviction and sentence.
“The Washington State Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to appeal.”
State v. Chetty, 167 Wash. App. 432, 438, 272 P.3d 918 (2012) (citing WASH CONST. art. I, § 22
amend. 10). A defendant, however, may relinquish his or her right to appeal. State v. Tomal, 133
Wash. 2d 985, 989, 948 P.2d 833 (1997). Waiver of the right to appeal must be made voluntarily,
knowingly, and intelligently. Id.
Reed does not address his signed waiver. Moreover, he makes no argument that the waiver
is invalid. Because the right to appeal may be waived, Reed signed a waiver, and Reed provides
3
No. 49149-4-II
no argument why we should not adhere to the waiver, we hold that this matter is not appealable.
Accordingly, we dismiss Reed’s appeal and the challenges raised in his SAG.
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.
Lee, J.
We concur:
Johanson, P.J.
Melnick, J.
4