State Of Washington, Respondent V. John Stuart Delafield, Appellant

82257-8Washctapp2 ago 2021

Apri la fonte

Testo completo

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent,
v.
JOHN STUART DELAFIELD,
Appellant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 82257-8-I
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
PER CURIAM — John Delafield appeals his conviction for possession of a
controlled substance in violation of RCW 69.50.4013(1). Delafield contends, and
the State concedes, that Delafield’s conviction must be vacated under State v.
Blake, in which our Supreme Court held RCW 69.50.4013(1) unconstitutional
and, thus, void. 197 Wn.2d 170, 195, 481 P.3d 521 (2021). We accept the
State’s concession, reverse Delafield’s conviction, and remand to the trial court
to vacate the conviction. Additionally, because the State represents that it will
not file a motion for reconsideration or a petition for review, we grant the State’s
request for an expedited mandate and direct the clerk to issue the mandate as
soon as is feasible. See RAP 12.5(b) (“The clerk of the Court of Appeals will
issue the mandate for a Court of Appeals decision terminating review upon
stipulation of the parties that no motion for reconsideration or petition for review
will be filed.”).
No. 82257-8-I/2
2
Reversed and remanded.
FOR THE COURT:

1 printed pages contain little extracted OCR body text; searchable legal-body completeness has not been established for those pages.

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

FILED
8/2/2021
Court of Appeals
Division |
State of Washington

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) No. 82257-8-1
Respondent, DIVISION ONE
V. UNPUBLISHED OPINION
JOHN STUART DELAFIELD,
Appellant. |

PER CURIAM — J ohn Delafield appeals his conviction for possession of a
controlled substance in violation of RCW 69.50.4013(1). Delafield contends, and
the State concedes, that Delafield’s conviction must be vacated under State v.
Blake, in which our Supreme Court held RCW 69.50.4013(1) unconstitutional
and, thus, void. 197 Wn.2d 170, 195, 481 P.3d 521 (2021). We accept the
State’s concession, reverse Delafield’s conviction, and remand to the trial court
to vacate the conviction. Additionally, because the State represents that it will
not file a motion for reconsideration or a petition for review, we grant the State’s
request for an expedited mandate and direct the clerk to issue the mandate as
soon as is feasible. See RAP 12.5(b) (“The clerk of the Court of Appeals will
issue the mandate fora Court of Appeals decision terminating review upon
stipulation of the parties that no motion for reconsideration or petition for review

will be filed.”).

No. 82257-8-I/2
Reversed and remanded.
FOR THE COURT:
Chan, C.
2

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.