State Of Washington, Respondent V. Demarcus A Rashahid, Appellant

Citations and pin cites are based on the Westlaw online version of the cited material.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent,
v.
DEMARCUS RASHAHID,
Appellant.
No. 80723-4-I
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
PER CURIAM — Demarcus Rashahid was convicted by a jury of first degree
unlawful possession of a firearm under RCW 9.41.040(1). The trial court imposed a
low-end standard range sentence of 41 months, and also imposed the requirement
that Rashahid register as a felony firearm offender.
Rashahid appeals, arguing that RCW 9.41.330, the felony firearm offender
registration statute, is unconstitutionally vague because it lacks guidance for
determining whether a person’s criminal history should require registration as a
felony firearm offender. But, as the State notes, the Washington Supreme Court
held in State v. Baldwin, 150 Wn.2d 448, 459, 78 P.3d 1005 (2003), that the due
process void-for-vagueness doctrine is not applicable to sentencing guidelines
because they neither “define conduct nor . . . allow for arbitrary arrest and
criminal prosecution by the State.” See also State v. Brush, 5 Wn. App. 2d 40, 63,
425 P.3d 545 (2018); State v. DeVore, 2 Wn. App. 2d 651, 664, 413 P.3d 58

80723-4 -I/2
- 2 -
(2018) (aggravating factors in RCW 9.94A.535(3) are not subject to a vagueness
challenge because they do not specify the sentence that must be imposed nor
limit the trial court's discretion during sentencing). Similarly, because RCW
9.41.330 does not fix sentencing aspects, and it neither proscribes nor prescribes
criminal conduct, the void-for-vagueness doctrine does not apply to RCW
9.41.330.
Affirmed.
For the Court: