Personal Restraint Petition Of Bryan Dorsey Aka Brian Dorsey

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of ) No. 80392-1-I
)
BRYAN DORSEY, ) DIVISION ONE
a/k/a BRIAN DORSEY, )
) UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Petitioner. )
PER CURIAM. In 2011, Brian Dorsey was convicted by a jury of first degree
robbery. The conviction was Dorsey’s third strike and the trial court imposed a
sentence of life in prison without the possibility of release under the Persistent
Offender Accountability Act (POAA), RCW 9.94A.030(38)(a) and RCW 9.94A.570.
One of Dorsey’s strike offenses was a 1997 Arkansas conviction for aggravated
robbery, deemed comparable to a Washington conviction for second degree
robbery.
In 2019, Dorsey filed a motion to modify the judgment and sentence in the
superior court. He contended that 2019 amendments to the POAA removed
second degree robbery from the list of strike offenses, rendering his POAA
sentence facially invalid. The motion was transferred to this court for consideration
as a personal restraint petition. CrR 7.8(c)(2).
To successfully challenge a judgment and sentence by means of a
personal restraint petition, a petitioner must establish either (1) actual and
substantial prejudice arising from constitutional error, or (2) nonconstitutional
error that inherently results in a “complete miscarriage of justice.” In re Pers.

No. 80392-1-I/2
Restraint of Cook, 114 Wn.2d 802, 813, 792 P.2d 506 (1990). But this court in
State v. Molia, 12 Wn. App. 2d 895, 904, 460 P.2d 1086 (2020) held that the
2019 amendments do not apply retroactively to offenses committed prior to their
effective date. Thus, Dorsey cannot show that the amendments would entitle
him to resentencing. He fails to establish error entitling him to relief and his
petition must be dismissed.