State Of Washington, Respondent V. Michael Lonell Matthews, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION II
STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 52457-1-II
Respondent,
v.
MICHAEL LONELL MATTHEWS, UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appellant.
SUTTON, J. — Michael L. Matthews appeals his judgment and sentence, arguing that the
trial court erred by failing to orally notify him that he lost the right to possess a firearm although
it informed him in writing in his judgment and sentence. The State acknowledges that the trial
court erred, but argues that because Matthews had six prior felony convictions that terminated his
right to possess firearms, he was well aware he had lost the right to possess a firearm. We hold
that the trial court erred by failing to orally advise Matthews that he cannot possess firearms. We
remand to the trial court to conduct a hearing to orally advise Matthews of the firearm possession
prohibition.
FACTS
The State charged Matthews with failure to register as a sex offender. A jury returned a
guilty verdict and found by special verdict that Matthews was previously convicted at least twice
of failure to register as a sex offender. At sentencing, the trial court imposed a standard range
sentence. The judgment and sentence contains a provision stating that Matthews was ineligible to
Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
March 3, 2020

No. 52457-1-II
2
possess a firearm. The trial court did not orally notify Matthews that he was ineligible to possess
a firearm at the verdict or at sentencing. Matthews appeals.
ANALYSIS
Matthews argues that the trial court erred by failing to orally notify him as required by
RCW 9.41.047(1)(a)1 that he had lost the right to possess a firearm due to his felony conviction.
We agree with Matthews and hold that the trial court erred and we remand to the trial court to
conduct a hearing to advise Matthews of the firearm possession prohibition.
The State argues that because Matthews has six prior felony convictions, it is not in the
interest of judicial economy for this court to remand this matter for a hearing to comply with the
statutory firearm notification. The State claims that because Matthews is in the Department of
Corrections’ custody, conducting a hearing would be a waste of resources to disrupt his
programs/treatment, transport him back to Cowlitz County to conduct a short hearing, and then
transport him back. Nothing in the record reflects that Matthews has been orally notified that he
has lost the right to possess a firearm. Further, we are not empowered to disregard a defendant’s
rights in the interest of judicial economy. Therefore, the State’s argument fails.
A person loses their right to possess a firearm once convicted of a felony.
RCW 9.41.040(2)(a)(i).2 Failing to register as a sex offender when a person has been convicted
of a felony failure to register as a sex offender in Washington State or pursuant to the laws of
1 The legislature amended RCW 9.41.047 in 2019. LAWS OF 2019, ch. 248 § 3. Because these
amendments are not relevant here, we cite to the current version of this statute.
2 The legislature amended RCW 9.41.040 in 2019. LAWS OF 2019, ch. 46 § 5003. Because these
and subsequent amendments are not relevant here, we cite to the current version of this statute.

No. 52457-1-II
3
another state, or pursuant to federal law, on two or more prior occasions, is a class B felony.
RCW 9A.44.132(1)(b).3 At the time of conviction, “the convicting or committing court . . . shall
notify the person, orally and in writing, that the person must immediately surrender any concealed
pistol license and that the person may not possess a firearm.” RCW 9.41.047(1)(a).
Here, the jury convicted Matthews for failure to register as a sex offender. The trial court
provided written notification, but did not orally notify Matthews that he had lost his right to possess
a firearm as required under RCW 9.41.047(1)(a). Therefore, we affirm his conviction, but remand
to the trial court for a hearing for the court to orally advise Matthews of the firearm prohibition to
comply with the statutory firearm notification.
3 The legislature amended RCW 9A.44.132 in 2019. LAWS OF 2019, ch. 443 § 4. Because these
amendments are not relevant here, we cite to the current version of this statute.

No. 52457-1-II
4
CONCLUSION
We hold that the trial court erred by failing to orally advise Matthews that he cannot possess
firearms. We remand to the trial court to conduct a hearing to orally advise Matthews of the
firearm possession prohibition.
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.
SUTTON, J.
We concur:
MAXA, C.J.
MELNICK, J.