Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
September 13, 2016
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION II
In re the Matter of No. 48492-7-II
the Personal Restraint Petition of
STEWART MICHAEL RIGGS,
Petitioner.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
JOHANSON, J. — Stewart Riggs seeks relief from personal restraint imposed following his
pleas of guilty in Kitsap County in 2014 to possession of a stolen vehicle and to second degree
identity theft and in Pierce County to second degree identity theft.1
First, as to the Kitsap County second degree identity theft conviction, the trial court
imposed a sentence of 57 months of confinement and 12 months of community custody. Riggs
argues that this sentence is illegal because the combination of the terms of confinement and
community custody exceed the 60-month statutory maximum punishment for the crime. RCW
9.35.020(3); RCW 9A.20.021(1)(c). The State concedes that Riggs is correct and that the sentence
violates RCW 9.94A.701(9), which requires that the term of community custody be reduced so as
to not exceed the statutory maximum. We accept the State’s concession and remand Riggs’s
judgment and sentence for correction.
Second, Riggs argues that the State breached the plea agreement when it did not return his
cell phone and Rolex watch that the State had seized. But he presents no evidence of an agreement
1
We issued the mandate of Riggs’s direct appeal on September 23, 2015, making his February 1,
2016 petition timely filed. RCW 10.73.090(3)(b).
No. 48492-7-II
to return his cell phone and watch, and to the contrary, in his statement on plea of guilty, Riggs
agreed to forfeiture of all seized property. He asserts, but presents no evidence to support, that his
trial counsel promised to write the return of the cell phone and watch into his judgment and
sentence. Riggs does not demonstrate that the State breached its plea agreement or that he received
ineffective assistance of counsel.
Finally, Riggs argues that the State undercut the plea agreement at his Pierce County
sentencing when the deputy prosecutor stated that the global plea agreement “was made by her
boss, however if it was up to her she would have [to] ask for a much longer sentence.” Pet. at 19.
But the transcript of the sentencing hearing contains no such statement. Riggs does not
demonstrate that the State undercut the plea agreement.
We grant Riggs’s personal restraint petition in part and remand his Kitsap County judgment
and sentence for correction. We deny the remainder of his petition.
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.
JOHANSON, J.
We concur:
WORSWICK, J.
BJORGEN, C.J.
2