State v. Peterson

Summary

The court held that CrR 7.8(b)(5) permits a defendant to seek relief from an order requiring payment of a drug court participation fee, even when no conviction was entered. It nevertheless held that federal due process does not require refunding Peterson’s fee because she voluntarily paid it under an agreement to avoid conviction, rather than as a consequence of an invalid conviction. The court also held that Peterson made the substantial showing necessary for the trial court to retain jurisdiction over her motion, although she ultimately failed on the merits.