FILED 

August 16, 2016 

In the Office of the Clerk of Court 

WA State Court of Appeals, Division III 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 

DIVISION THREE 

In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of ) 

) 

) 

LEWIS A. LAWRENCE, ) 

) 

Petitioner. ) 

) 

) 

No. 31827-3-111 

UNPUBLISHED OPINION 

KORSMO, J. -An incompetent person may not be tried, convicted, or sentenced 

as long as the incapacity continues. RCW 10.77.050. Lewis A. Lawrence seeks relief 

from personal restraint imposed in his 2010 Whitman County convictions of three counts 

of attempted first degree murder. He contends he was incompetent to stand trial and to 

represent himself at trial due to his fetal alcohol syndrome disorder (FASD). After this 

court remanded the matter to superior court for a reference hearing, the superior court 

entered findings that he suffered from F ASD at the time of trial and sentencing, and that 

this disorder rendered him incompetent to stand trial and to waive counsel. Accordingly, 

we grant his personal restraint petition, reverse his convictions, and remand for further 

proceedings. 
No. 31827-3-III 

In re Pers. Restraint of Lawrence 

In March 2009, Mr. Lawrence had a disagreement with two friends over dinner 

plans and left their apartment. 1 Later, he returned with a shotgun, shot one friend in the 

face with birdshot, and fired twice into the apartment without injuring the two other 

people inside. When he was arrested, he told the police he wanted to kill his friends 

because they were part of a Samoan gang that has threatened his family. These 

allegations of a Samoan gang threat had no basis in reality. 

From the time he was charged, it was apparent that Mr. Lawrence's behavior was 

unusual. Based on competency evaluations by Eastern State Hospital (Eastern), the trial 

court initially found him incompetent to stand trial, but later ruled him competent after 

treatment. Mental health experts variously diagnosed him with psychosis, antisocial 

personality disorder with narcissistic personality features, and bipolar disorder. Mr. 

Lawrence requested permission to represent himself. Counsel for both parties again 

questioned his competence and defense counsel advised the court that Mr. Lawrence's 

family believes he may have fetal alcohol syndrome. In two successive competency 

hearings, the trial court first found that he was incompetent and later relied on a new 

report from Eastern to find him competent. The trial judge, however, denied Mr. 

Lawrence's request to proceed prose. Three days later, Mr. Lawrence filed an affidavit 

1 A full recitation of the facts of Mr. Lawrence's crimes and the lengthy pretrial 

and trial proceedings is set out in State v. Lawrence, 166 Wn. App. 378, 380-85, 271 P.3d 

280, review denied, 174 Wn.2d 1009(2012). 

2 
No. 31827-3-III 

In re Pers. Restraint of Lawrence 

of prejudice against the judge, who recused himself. The new trial judge later accepted 

Mr. Lawrence's waiver of counsel. 

Mr. Lawrence's jury trial was held in April 2010. He represented himself, served 

as the sole defense witness, and testified that he was on the other side of town robbing six 

men of their black diamonds at the time of the crimes. The jury convicted him as charged 

and he represented himself again at sentencing. 

On appeal, Mr. Lawrence argued, in part, that the trial court erred in finding that 

he was competent to stand trial and to represent himself. This court affirmed his 

judgment and sentence and the Washington Supreme Court denied review. See State v. 

Lawrence, 166 Wn. App. 378, 271 P.3d 280, review denied, 174 Wn.2d 1009 (2012). 

Mr. Lawrence then filed a timely personal restraint petition and submitted a new mental 

health evaluation of his incompetence due to F ASD. The chief judge of this court 

dismissed his personal restraint petition, concluding that the trial court's competency 

decision was reasonable under the circumstances. See Order, In re Pers. Restraint of 

Lawrence, No. 31827-3-III (Wash. Ct. App. Nov. 4, 2014). 

In October 2015, the Washington Supreme Court accepted review of Mr. 

Lawrence's petition, vacated the order dismissing it, and remanded to this court. See 

Amended Order, In re Pers. Restraint of Lawrence, No. 91063-4 (Wash. Sup. Ct. Oct. 12, 

2015). The Supreme Court directed this court to transfer the case to the Whitman County 

3 

I 

I 

' 

i 

I 

' i 

l 

I 

l 

I 

I I 

! 

I 

I 

1 
No. 31827-3-III 

In re Pers. Restraint of Lawrence 

Superior Court for a RAP 16.12 reference hearing concerning Mr. Lawrence's 

competency during trial and sentencing. 

On October 26, 2015, we entered an order transferring the personal restraint 

petition to superior court for a reference hearing, and directed the superior court to enter 

findings on the following questions: 

1. Did Mr. Lawrence suffer from the effects of F ASD at the time of trial and 

sentencing? 

2. If so, what effects of Mr. Lawrence's reported FASD, if any, would have been 

relevant to his competency to stand trial? 

3. Taking into consideration any relevant effects of Mr. Lawrence's reported 

FASD, was he competent to stand trial at the time of trial, conviction and 

sentencing? 

4. What effects of Mr. Lawrence's reported FASD, if any, would have been 

relevant to his ability to knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel? 

5. Taking into consideration any relevant effects of Mr. Lawrence's reported 

F ASD, did he knowingly and willingly waive his right to counsel at the time of 

trial, conviction, and sentencing? See, e.g., In re Rhome, 172 Wn.2d 654, 260 

P.3d 654 (2011). 

4 
No. 31827-3-III 

In re Pers. Restraint of Lawrence 

In a March 2016 reference hearing with a new judge, 11 witnesses testified. The 

judge found that (1) Mr. Lawrence suffered from FASD at the time of his trial, 

conviction, and sentencing; (2) the F ASD, along with bipolar disorder, post-traumatic 

stress disorder, periods of delusional thinking, and psychotic symptoms, impaired his 

ability to understand and assist in his defense; (3) he was therefore incompetent at the 

time of trial, conviction, and sentencing; ( 4) his pervasive and severe impairments due to 

F ASD and the other disorders-impairments that caused difficulty in relating actions to 

consequences-interfered with his ability to knowingly and intelligently waive the right 

to counsel; and (5) he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel at the 

time of his trial, conviction, and sentencing. The State in supplemental briefing to this 

court does not dispute the superior court's findings and agrees that Mr. Lawrence "has 

met his burden to show that he was incompetent at the time of trial and did not knowingly 

waive his right to counsel." Resp't's Supplemental Br. re: Reference Hearing at 4. 

To prevail in a personal restraint petition, a petitioner must show that he is 

unlawfully restrained due to an error of constitutional magnitude that substantially 

prejudiced him, or due to a fundamental defect of a nonconstitutional nature that caused a 

complete miscarriage of justice. In re Pers. Restraint of Finstad, 177 Wn.2d 501, 506, 

301 P.3d 450 (2013). Mr. Lawrence's trial and conviction while incompetent and his 

involuntary waiver of counsel violated his constitutional right to due process. See State v. 

5 
No. 31827-3-III 

In re Pers. Restraint of Lawrence 

Heddrick, 166 Wn.2d 898, 904, 215 P .3d 201 (2009) (incapacity to stand trial); In re 

Disciplinary Hrg. against Meade, 103 Wn.2d 374, 380-81, 693 P.2d 713 (1985) 

(incompetence to appear pro se ). This error substantially prejudiced his defense. 

Consequently, we grant his personal restraint petition, reverse his conviction, and 

remand for further proceedings. 

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. 

WE CONCUR: 

Pennell, J. 

6