The State of Washington v. John W. Grayson

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that a trial judge's decision whether to grant a drug offender sentencing alternative (DOSA) is discretionary but must actually be exercised: because the sentencing judge denied DOSA primarily on his belief that the program lacked funding, articulated no other reasons, and cut off the prosecutor's attempt to place additional reasons on the record, he categorically refused to consider a statutorily authorized sentencing alternative, which is reversible error. The court also held that judges may rely on general legislative facts about a sentencing program without a hearing, while a case-specific fact such as a program's underfunding may become adjudicative and warrant a hearing if timely objected to — Grayson did not object. The sentence was vacated and remanded for a new sentencing hearing. Judge Bridge, dissenting, joined by Owens, Fairhurst, and Ireland, JJ., would have affirmed, reading the record as showing case-specific consideration of DOSA rather than a categorical refusal.