State Of Washington, V. Taylor Norton

CourtCourt of Appeals of Washington
DecidedMarch 23, 2026
Docket87879-4
StatusUnpublished

This text of State Of Washington, V. Taylor Norton (State Of Washington, V. Taylor Norton) 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.

Bluebook
State Of Washington, V. Taylor Norton, (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE

STATE OF WASHINGTON No. 87879-4-I Respondent, DIVISION ONE v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION TAYLOR JACOB NORTON,

Appellant.

PER CURIAM — Taylor Norton appeals the felony judgement and sentence

entered after he pleaded guilty to 23 crimes, including identity theft in the second

degree. For ten counts of identity theft in the second degree, the court imposed a

sentence of 57 months of confinement followed by 12 months of community custody.

The court also imposed a no-contact order for a maximum term of 10 years for named

victims of Norton’s crimes. Norton argues that the judgment and sentence contains

three errors; the State concedes all three.

First, Norton argues that the combined term of confinement and community

custody for the identity theft in the second-degree convictions, class C felonies, exceeds

the statutory maximum term of confinement. Second-degree identity theft is a class C

felony, RCW 9.35.020(3), and the statutory maximum term of confinement for class C

felonies is 60 months, RCW 9A.20.021(1)(c). The court’s combined sentence of 57

months of confinement followed by 12 months of community custody exceeds the

statutory maximum by nine months. Norton’s term of community custody must be No. 87879-4-I/2

reduced to three months to bring the combined term to the statutory maximum. See

RCW 9.94A.701(10) (providing that the term of community custody shall be reduced

when, combined with the term of confinement, it exceeds the statutory maximum).

Second, Norton argues that the 10-year no-contact term in paragraph 4.5 of the

judgment and sentence exceeded the statutory maximum as to named victims Mehgan

Sichel, Stephen Sichel, Leonil Lelis and Patrick Bello. Those four individuals were

victims of Norton’s class C felonies, which carry a statutory maximum of five years.

RCW 9A.20.021(1)(c). A no-contact order may not exceed the statutory maximum of the

crime. State v. Nielsen, 14 Wn. App. 2d 466, 453, 471 P.3d 257 (2020). The no-contact

term as to these four individuals must be reduced to five years.

Last, Norton notes that the judgment and sentence incorrectly states in

paragraph 2.4 that the maximum term and fine for second-degree identity theft is 10

years and $20,000. The correct maximum term and fine is five years and $10,000. RCW

9.35.020(3); RCW 9A.20.021(1)(c). The judgment and sentence must be corrected

accordingly.

We accept the State’s concessions and remand to the superior court solely to

correct the identified errors in the judgment and sentence.

FOR THE COURT:

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Of Washington v. Madison Anthony Nielsen
471 P.3d 257 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State Of Washington, V. Taylor Norton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-washington-v-taylor-norton-washctapp-2026.