FILED 

### COURT OF APPEALS 2015 FEB - 

### 3 

## Ali 9: 06. STATE OF WASHINGTON

GTGH BY 0 UTY

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON,

v. ALAN J. HECKARD, DIVISION II Respondent,

Appellant. No. 45377 -1 - II UNPUBLISHED OPINION

BJORGEN, A.C.J. — Alan Heckard pled guilty to first degree extortion and, following a subsequent restitution hearing, was ordered to pay. $ 4,279.52 in restitution. Heckard appeals the trial court' s restitution order but does not assert any errorwith the order. Instead he asserts that 

### he should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because the trial court entered the plea in violation ofhis due process rights and his right to ajurytrial. Heckard has also filed a statement of additional grounds for review (SAG), but his SAG fails to sufficiently inform this court "of the nature and occurrence of alleged errors" in his restitution order, and thus we do not address it. RAP 10. 10( c). 

### Because Heckard did not timely appeal his guilty plea conviction and because
none of the issues raised in this appeal asserts any error in the restitution order, we affirm.No. 45377 -1 - II FACTS On March 8, 2013, the State charged Heckard with two counts of first degree extortion, one count ofsecond degree malicious mischief,and one count ofharassment. On April 26, Heckard entered into a plea agreement with the State, under which he would plead guilty to one count offirst degree extortion in exchange forthe State dropping his remaining charges and 

### recommending an exceptional downward sentence ofone year and one day ofincarceration followed by one year ofcommunity custody. As part ofthe plea agreement, Heckard also agreed that his restitution would relate to both " charged counts and uncharged counts." Clerk' s Papers 

### CP) at 8. Following an April 26 plea hearing atwhich the trial court entered into a lengthy colloquy with Heckard regarding his waiver ofcertain rights by pleading guilty,thetrial court accepted Heckard' s guilty plea, finding that he entered into the plea agreement "knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily, [ and with] no threats or coercion." Report of Proceedings ( RP) at 13. 

### At Heckard' s May 3 sentencing hearing,the trial court ruled that it would impose the 

### State' s recommended exceptional downward sentence ofone year and one day ofincarceration, 

### and it entered itsjudgment and sentence that same day. Heckard did not appeal his guilty plea conviction. Overthree months later, on August 16 the trial court held a restitution hearing and 

### entered a restitution order directing Heckard to pay $4,279.52. On September 11 Heckard filed a notice of appeal that sought review " ofthe restitution order entered on August 16, 2013." CP at 44.

2No. 45377 -1 - II ANALYSIS In this appeal from the trial court' s August 16 order of restitution, Heckard contends that 

### he should be;allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because the trial court entered the plea in violation of his due process rights and his right to ajury trial.' With certain exceptions not relevant here, RAP 5. 2(a) provides that " a notice of appeal must be filed in the trial court within . 

### 30 days afterthe entry ofthe decision ofthe trial court thatthe party filing the notice wants reviewed." 

### Therefore, ifHeckard wanted to challenge the validity ofhis guilty plea conviction 

### in a direct appeal, he had 30 days from the entry ofhisjudgment and sentence on May 3, 2013 in which to file a notice ofappeal. Heckard did not do so and, thus, the validity ofhis unchallenged 

### guilty plea conviction is not properly before us in this appeal from the trial court's restitution order. Accordingly, we do not further address it. In his SAG, Heckard appears to complain about the past conduct of his extortion victim and other residents ofthe recreational vehicle park in which he and the victim lived. Heckard 

### fails to explain,though, how these complaints relate to any error in the restitution orderthat is the subject ofthis appeal, contrary to the requirements of RAP 10. 10( c). Accordingly, we do not 

### Specifically, Heckard argues that the trial court entered his guilty plea in violation ofhis due process rights because: ( 1) the plea agreement failed to mention the mens rea element required to convict him of first degree extortion and, thus, lacked a sufficient factual basis upon which the trial court could accept his plea; (2) the record does not establish a knowing and voluntary waiver of his rights in light ofthe trial court' s failure to inform Heckard ofhis privilege against 

### self - incrimination, right to ajury trial, and right to confront adverse witnesses; and (3) the vague restitution term regarding "charged counts and uncharged counts" shows thatthe State and 

### defendant lacked a " meeting ofthe minds" and, thus, demonstrates that Heckard did not knowingly and voluntarily enter into the plea agreement. Br.ofAppellant at 8. Heckard also argues (4) that the trial court entered his guilty plea in violation ofhisjury trial right because 

### neitherthe plea agreement northe trial court had specifically advised him about " his rightto participate in selectingjurors, his rightto afair and impartialjury, his rightto ajury oftwelve people, or his right to a unanimous verdict." Br. ofAppellant at 18. 3No. 45377 -1 - II



### furtheraddress his SAG. Because Heckard does not claim any error in the restitution orderthat is the subject ofthis appeal, we affirm. 

### A majority ofthe panel having determined thatthis opinion will notbe printed inthe Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2.06.040, it is so ordered.

We concur:
Wo :SWICK, J.

4 

# 4,