Opinion ID: 1192048
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The SRA and Prosecutorial Discretion

Text: Under the SRA, prosecutors are given great discretion in determining which charges are to be filed against a defendant. One commentator noted that [i]t is clear the Sentencing Guidelines Commission and the Legislature intended to prevent judicial review of [the prosecutor's charging] decisions. D. Boerner, Sentencing in Washington § 12.24, at 12-47 (1985). [4] It is a long-recognized principle that prosecutors are vested with wide discretion in determining how and when to file criminal charges. Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357, 365, 54 L.Ed.2d 604, 98 S.Ct. 663 (1978); State v. Pettitt, 93 Wn.2d 288, 294, 609 P.2d 1364 (1980). Exercise of this discretion involves consideration of numerous factors, including the public interest as well as the strength of the State's case. United States v. Lovasco, 431 U.S. 783, 794, 52 L.Ed.2d 752, 97 S.Ct. 2044 (1977). Under this analysis, the prosecutor had no duty to charge the defendant after the first delivery to the King County Police informant. Likewise, in his discretion, the prosecutor could charge as separate counts each of the deliveries made by the defendant. This court has held that [w]hether the incidents are to be charged separately or brought as one charge is a decision within prosecutorial discretion. State v. Petrich, 101 Wn.2d 566, 572, 683 P.2d 173 (1984). In this case, charges were filed that were necessary to reflect the nature and extent of the defendant's criminal activity.