State Of Washington, V. Jeffrey Scott Nelson

Opinion

Filed Washington State Court of Appeals Division Two

October 7, 2025

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION II

STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 59706-3-II

Respondent,

v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION JEFFREY SCOTT NELSON,

Appellant.

VELJACIC, A.C.J. — Jeffrey S. Nelson appeals the sentences imposed following his guilty

pleas to several felonies filed under four separate Pierce County Superior Court cause numbers.1

Because the sentence in this case falls within the standard range, it is not subject to appeal.

Therefore, we affirm Nelson’s sentence.

FACTS

Nelson pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree under Pierce

County Superior Court cause no. 23-1-03307-0. Nelson also pleaded guilty to identity theft in the

first degree, forgery, and attempted theft of a motor vehicle under Pierce County Superior Court

cause no. 23-1-02428-3; unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree under Pierce County

Superior Court cause no. 23-1-00201-8; and identity theft in the second degree, theft in the second

1 This appeal (Nelson II) is linked with State v. Nelson, No. 59696-2-II (Nelson I). These matters were considered by a panel of the court on the same day. Nelson I and Nelson II are linked with State v. Nelson, No. 59676-8-II (Nelson III) and State v. Nelson, No. 59686-5-II (Nelson IV), which were considered on a different day by a different panel. 59706-3-II

degree, and trafficking in stolen property in the first degree in Pierce County Superior Court cause

no. 23-1-02427-5.

Nelson had at least 19 prior convictions resulting in an offender score of 9+.

The trial court sentenced Nelson in a single proceeding on all four cause numbers.

Regarding this matter, cause no. 23-1-03307-0, Nelson’s standard sentencing range was 87-116

months. The court imposed a standard range sentence of 87 months.

Additionally, the trial court imposed 87 months on the unlawful possession of a firearm in

the first degree conviction under cause no. 23-1-00201-8. The court imposed an exceptional

sentence on that sentence by ordering it be served consecutively to a 63-month sentence imposed

under cause no. 23-1-02428-3. The trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law to

support its exceptional sentence. The court concluded that, based on Nelson’s high offender score,

some of his crimes would go unpunished if the court were to sentence each offense to be served

concurrently. Combining the 63-month sentence with the 87-month sentence, Nelson’s total

sentence was 150 months in custody.

Nelson appeals his sentence in cause no. 23-1-03307-0.

ANALYSIS

Nelson argues that the trial court erred in imposing an exceptional sentence that resulted in

a sentence longer than the maximum sentence allowed on his individual offenses and that this

argument is relevant to this matter because all four cases were sentenced in a single proceeding.

The State responds that we need not reach this issue because Nelson received a standard range

sentence under cause no. 23-1-02427-5, which is not appealable. We agree with the State.

The general rule is that a sentence within the standard sentence range for an offense cannot

be appealed. RCW 9.94A.585(1); State v. Glant, 13 Wn. App. 2d 356, 376, 465 P.3d 382 (2020).

2 59706-3-II

“The rationale is that a trial court that imposes a sentence within the range set by the legislature

cannot abuse its discretion as to the length of the sentence as a matter of law.” Id.

Here, Nelson pled guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree under cause

no. 23-1-03307-0. Nelson’s standard sentence range was 87-116 months. The court imposed a

standard range sentence of 87 months. This is the low end of the standard range. Because Nelson

received a standard range sentence, his sentence is not appealable. RCW 9.94A.585(1); Glant, 13

Wn. App. 2d at 376.

CONCLUSION

We affirm Nelson’s sentence in cause no. 23-1-003307-0.

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.

Veljacic, A.C.J.

We concur:

Maxa, J.

Che, J.