State Of Washington, V. Adam Michael Don Workman ( 2022 )

Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
April 12, 2022
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION II
STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 55908-1-II
Respondent,
v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ADAM MICHAEL DON WORKMAN,
Appellant.
MAXA, P.J. – Adam Workman appeals the judgment and sentence entered after his
convictions on multiple charges. Workman argues, and the State concedes, that (1) the judgment
and sentence contains a scrivener’s error and (2) the trial court failed to conduct an adequate
inquiry into his ability to pay before imposing attorney fees as a discretionary legal financial
obligation (LFO). We accept the concession, and remand for the trial court to correct the
scrivener’s error and to properly inquire into Workman’s ability to pay before imposing attorney
fees as an LFO.
FACTS
In April 2021, Workman was convicted of multiple offenses after a jury trial. The trial
court entered a judgment and sentence that stated that the jury found an aggravating
circumstance of domestic violence under RCW 9.94A.535(3)(h). As part of the sentence, the
court imposed as LFOs $500 in attorney fees and community custody supervision fees as
determined by the Department of Corrections.
No. 55908-1-II
Workman appeals the recitation of the domestic violence aggravating circumstance and
the imposition of the LFOs.
ANALYSIS
A. SCRIVENER’S ERROR
As the State concedes, the provision of the judgment and sentence that Workman was
found guilty of an aggravating circumstance of domestic violence under RCW 9.94A.535(3)(h)
was an error. The court did not instruct the jury on that aggravating circumstance and the jury
did not find that aggravating circumstance. Therefore, we remand for the trial court to remove
this provision from the judgment and sentence.
B. IMPOSITION OF LFOS
Under RCW 10.01.160(1), a trial court may require a defendant to pay “costs.” Court-
appointed attorney fees constitute costs under RCW 10.01.160(1). In re Pers. Restraint of Dove,
196 Wn. App. 148, 155, 381 P.3d 1280 (2016). However, costs cannot be imposed on an
indigent defendant. RCW 10.01.160(3).
In State v. Blazina, the Supreme Court held that the trial court must conduct an
individualized inquiry on the record about a defendant’s current and future ability to pay before
imposing discretionary LFOs. 182 Wn.2d 827, 839, 344 P.3d 680 (2015). The court must
consider several specific factors in making this inquiry. State v. Ramirez, 191 Wn.2d 732, 742-
44, 426 P.3d 714 (2018).
The trial court imposed $500 in attorney fees as an LFO. However, as the State
concedes, the court did not make an adequate inquiry into Workman’s ability to pay. Therefore,
we remand for the trial court to reconsider imposition of attorney fees as an LFO after inquiring
into Workman’s ability to pay.
2
No. 55908-1-II
The imposition of community custody supervision fees requires a different analysis. A
discretionary supervision fee is not a “cost” as defined in RCW 10.01.160(2), and therefore the
prohibition in RCW 10.01.160(3) of imposing “costs” on an indigent person is inapplicable.
State v. Spaulding, 15 Wn. App. 2d 526, 536-37, 476 P.3d 205 (2020). However, on remand the
trial court is free to consider whether or not to exercise its discretion to impose community
custody supervision fees.
CONCLUSION
We remand for the trial court to correct the scrivener’s error and to properly inquire into
Workman’s ability to pay before imposing attorney fees as an LFO.
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.
MAXA, P.J.
We concur:
CRUSER, J.
VELJACIC, J.
3