State v. Lucero

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that the defendant’s statements regarding his offender score did not constitute an affirmative acknowledgment that his California convictions were comparable to Washington offenses. Applying State v. Mendoza, the court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for a comparability determination and further sentencing proceedings.

Holdings

1. A defendant's acknowledgment that an offender score would still include one conviction if another conviction washed out is not an affirmative acknowledgment that the convictions are comparable to Washington crimes and does not waive a sentencing challenge based on comparability.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Lucero affirmatively acknowledged the comparability of his California convictions, thereby waiving a challenge to their inclusion in his offender score.
2. Whether the trial court was required to determine the comparability of the California convictions before relying on them in calculating Lucero's offender score.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded