State Of Washington, V. Nathan Rae Huber
This text of State Of Washington, V. Nathan Rae Huber (State Of Washington, V. Nathan Rae Huber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE
STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 83256-5-I Respondent. DIVISION ONE v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION NATHAN RAE HUBER,
Appellant.
PER CURIAM — Nathan Huber appeals from the judgment and sentence entered
upon his jury conviction of one count of kidnapping in the second degree with sexual
motivation. The trial court imposed a sentence of life without the possibility of parole
under the sex offense—or “two strikes”—provision of the Persistent Offender
Accountability Act of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981, chapter 9.94A RCW. The
predicate “strike” was a 1998 Jefferson County Superior Court conviction for an offense
Huber committed as a juvenile. The State acknowledges that it “did not provide the trial
court with the relevant juvenile records to establish that Huber’s 1998 offense was
validly declined to adult court.” It thus concedes that the evidence was insufficient to
support the trial court’s finding that Huber is a persistent offender.
We accept the State’s concession. Cf. State v. Saenz, 175 Wn.2d 167, 175-76,
283 P.3d 1094 (2012) (where State relies on defendant’s prior conviction as a juvenile
in adult court to seek a persistent offender sentence, it must prove “that either there was
a decline hearing or the hearing was properly waived and the juvenile court entered No. 83256-5-I/2
written findings that transfer of the case was in either [the defendant]’s or the public’s
best interest” (footnote omitted)). Accordingly, we reverse Huber’s sentence and
remand to the trial court for resentencing. 1
Reversed and remanded.
FOR THE COURT:
1 Because we reverse Huber’s sentence on the basis stated, we need not and do not consider
Huber’s other challenges to his sentence, including his challenge to the victim penalty assessment, the imposition of which the trial court may reconsider on remand.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State Of Washington, V. Nathan Rae Huber, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-washington-v-nathan-rae-huber-washctapp-2024.