l 

j 

l 

j 

I I I 

' 

I 

ii 

1 

l 

1 

l 

FILED 

OCTOBER 4, 2016 

In the Office of the Clerk of Court 

WA State Court of Appeals, Division Ill 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 

DIVISION THREE 

STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) 

) 

Respondent, ) 

) 

V. ) 

) 

RICHARD EUGENE CORNWELL, JR., ) 

) 

Appellant. ) 

No. 33326-4-111 

UNPUBLISHED OPINION 

PENNELL, J. - Richard Cornwell appeals a superior court order denying his 

motion to vacate legal financial obligations (LFOs ). Because the State has not yet 

attempted to enforce the LFO order, Mr. Cornwell is not an aggrieved party. His appeal 

is therefore dismissed. 

BACKGROUND 

While serving a lengthy prison sentence, Mr. Cornwell filed a motion in Walla 

Walla County Superior Court to vacate LFOs. Mr. Cornwell owes over $5,000 in LFOs, 

but payments are not scheduled to begin until after his release from prison, which is 

projected to occur in 2025. The basis of Mr. Cornwell's motion to vacate was there had 

not been a sufficient finding of ability to pay under State v. Blazina, 182 Wn.2d 827, 344 

P .3d 680 (2015). 
No. 33326-4-111 

State v. Cornwell 

The superior court denied Mr. Cornwell' s motion after holding a brief hearing. 

Mr. Cornwell appeals. 

ANALYSIS 

Under RAP 3 .1, "[ o ]nly an aggrieved party may seek review by the appellate 

court." Mr. Cornwell is not yet an aggrieved party as he is still in custody and no effort 

has been made to enforce payment of his LFOs. State v. Mahone, 98 Wn. App. 342, 348, 

989 P.2d 583 (1999). Although the trial court denied Mr. Cornwell's motion to vacate 

costs, "he suffers no concrete injury until the State seeks to enforce payment and 

contemporaneously determines his ability to pay." Id.; State v. Smits, 152 Wn. App. 514, 

525,216 P.3d 1097 (2009). While Mr. Cornwell'sjudgment and sentence authorized the 

Department of Corrections to deduct inmate wages for purposes of repayment of LFOs 

under RCW 72.11.20, this authorization does not constitute a collection action by the 

State "requiring inquiry into a defendant's financial status." State v. Crook, 146 Wn. App. 

24, 27-28, 189 P .3d 811 (2008). 

The Supreme Court's decision in Blazina does not undermine the reasoning in 

decisions such as Mahone, Smits, and Crook. Blazina addressed the requirements for a 

superior court's factual findings regarding ability to pay court costs. A defendant 

dissatisfied with the findings set forth in his or her judgment and sentence can bring up 

2 
No. 33326-4-111 

State v. Cornwell 

this issue in a direct appeal. See State v. Bertrand, 165 Wn. App. 393, 267 P.3d 511 

(2011) (reversing for insufficient findings pre-Blazina). But Blazina did not create a 

mechanism for reopening a final judgment in cases like Mr. Comwell's where no 

objections were made during the direct appeal process. 

Importantly, Blazina did not reverse State v. Blank, 131 Wn.2d 230, 930 P.2d 1213 

( 1997), which held the constitutional right to contest imposition of fines on the basis of 

indigence is not ripe until enforcement. Mahone, Smits and Crook are all premised on 

Blank. They are not undermined by Blazina. 

CONCLUSION 

Mr. Comwell's LFO claims are denied as they are not ripe for review. The appeal 

is dismissed. 

A majority of the panel has determined this opinion will not be printed in the 

Washington Appellate Reports, but it will be filed for public record pursuant to RCW 

2.06.040. 

Pennell, J. 

WE CONCUR: 

K ~I rsmo, J 

3