State Of Washington, Res/cross-app. V. Edmond Maynor, App/cross-res.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent,
No. 75115-8-1
(consolidated w/76093-9-I)
v. ) DIVISION ONE
)
EDMOND MAYNOR, ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION
)
Appellant. ) FILED: February 12, 2018
)
(-7
(noTeo
CP
-11
Cr% C:7•-•=e-1
7;;• rrt
Cf)rn
4? aCi
Cs, S
PER CURIAM. Edmond Maynor appeals an order of restitution entered
on remand from our decision affirming his convictions for robbery and two counts
of assault. See State v. Maynor, No. 70858-9-1 (Wash. Ct. App. (Oct. 12, 2015)
(unpublished), http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/708589.pdf. Maynor's
counsel on appeal contends the restitution order exceeded the scope of this
court's remand "for resentencing." He asks this court to "vacate the restitution
order and remand for reinstatement of the original order." The State concedes
that the original restitution order should be reinstated. We accept the State's
concession and remand for reinstatement of the original order of restitution.
In a "Statement of Additional Grounds for Review," Maynor contends his
trial counsel was ineffective for failing to confront or cross-examine certain
witnesses. But "[t]he general rule is that a defendant is prohibited from raising
issues on a second appeal that were or could have been raised on the first
appeal." State v. Fort, 190 Wn. App. 202, 233-34, 360 P.3d 820 (2015), review

No. 75115-8-1/2
denied, 185 Wn.2d 1011(2016)(citing RAP 2.5(c); State v. Sauve, 100 Wn.2d
84, 87, 666 P.2d 894 (1983); State v. Mandanas, 163 Wn. App. 712, 716, 262
P.3d 522(2011)). This rule applies even when the issue is one of constitutional
magnitude. Mandanas, 163 Wn. App. at 716-17. Maynor offers no basis for
concluding that the general rule does not apply to his ineffective assistance
claim.
Maynor also contends the resentencing court erred in failing to include his
good time and jail credit on the judgment and sentence. It is clear from the
record, however, that the exact amount of credit was not known at the time of
resentencing. The judgment and sentence awards Maynor "any/all earned early
release as awarded by each facility." The court committed no error.
Remanded for reinstatement of the original order of restitution.
For the Court:
2