The State of Washington, Respondent v. Charles William Post, Petitioner

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court affirmed Charles Post's 180-month exceptional sentence for first degree rape and burglary, holding that the trial court properly considered his 1980 statements to a Department of Corrections psychologist as evidence of future dangerousness. The court reversed the Court of Appeals' contrary Fifth Amendment ruling, concluding Post was not in Miranda custody, was not interrogated, faced no penalty for invoking the privilege, and that the psychologist-patient privilege of RCW 18.83.110 did not apply because the interview was not intended to be confidential. It further held that protection of the public cannot be a separate aggravating factor where future dangerousness is established, declined to extend the appearance of fairness doctrine to the presentence report writer, and found no abuse of discretion in denying a new trial over a detective's remark.