Court Opinion

ID: 9930479
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-06 22:14:35.345283+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:18:26.740267
License: Public Domain

Filed
                                                                                        Washington State
                                                                                        Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Division Two

                                                                                         February 6, 2024

    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

                                         DIVISION II
 STATE OF WASHINGTON,                                               No. 57554-0-II

                        Respondent,

        v.
                                                             UNPUBLISHED OPINION
 JOHN LAWRENCE BRESLIN III,

                        Appellant.

       PRICE, J. — John L. Breslin III was convicted of a felony violation of a court order for text

messages he sent to his ex-girlfriend. Although there was no evidence that Breslin used a firearm

for his offense, the trial court’s judgment and sentence included a finding that Breslin committed

a felony firearm offense and required him to register as a felony firearm offender.

       Breslin appeals, arguing the trial court’s finding and resulting registration requirement

were errors. The State concedes the trial court exceeded its authority. We reverse and remand for

the trial court to strike the finding that Breslin committed a felony firearm offense and the

requirement that he register as a felony firearm offender.

                                             FACTS

       In August 2021, Breslin was served with a temporary order of protection prohibiting him

from contacting his ex-girlfriend. Two days later, the ex-girlfriend reported that Breslin had sent

her text messages. Law enforcement investigated and confirmed the text messages violated the

protection order.
No. 57554-0-II

          Breslin was charged with one count of a felony violation of a court order under former

RCW 26.50.110(5) (2020).1 There was no allegation that Breslin possessed or used a firearm for

his offense. At trial, the jury found Breslin guilty.

          Notwithstanding that Breslin did not use or possess a firearm, the trial court entered a

judgment and sentence finding that Breslin committed a felony firearm offense and ordered him

to register as a felony firearm offender.

                                             ANALYSIS

          Breslin argues, and the State concedes, that the trial court exceeded its authority when it

made its firearm offense finding and imposed the registration requirement. We agree.

          Whether the trial court exceeded its sentencing authority is a question of law we review de

novo. State v. Putman, 21 Wn. App. 2d 36, 51, 504 P.3d 868, review denied, 199 Wn.2d 1023

(2022).

          “A defendant may be ordered to register as a felony firearm offender under RCW 9.41.333

only if he or she was convicted of a felony firearm offense.” State v. Rios, 6 Wn. App. 2d 855,

858, 431 P.3d 1016 (2018). Relevant to this case, a “felony firearm offense” is defined as “[a]ny

1
 Breslin stipulated that he had two previous convictions for violating court orders. Former RCW
26.50.110(5) makes violation of a court order a class C felony if the defendant had two previous
convictions for violating a court order.

                                                   2
No. 57554-0-II

felony offense if the offender was armed with a firearm in the commission of the offense.”2 RCW

9.41.010(19)(e).3

       Here, there is no evidence that Breslin was convicted of a felony firearm offense. The State

did not introduce evidence that Breslin was armed when he texted his ex-girlfriend or that he

committed any other felony firearm offense relevant to this case. And the State concedes as much.

Without this evidence, the trial court exceeded its sentencing authority.

                                         CONCLUSION

       We reverse and remand for the trial court to strike the finding that Breslin committed a

felony firearm offense and the requirement that he register as a felony firearm offender consistent

with this opinion.

2
  RCW 9.41.010(19) also enumerates that “felony firearm offense[s]” include felony violations
under chapter 9.41 RCW (“Firearms and Dangerous Weapons”) and other specific offenses, like
drive-by shooting (RCW 9A.36.045), theft of a firearm (RCW 9A.56.300), and possessing a stolen
firearm (RCW 9A.56.310). Felony violation of a court order is not a specifically enumerated
felony firearm offense. See RCW 9.41.010(19).
3
  Former versions of RCW 9.41.010 were in effect when Breslin committed the court order
violation and was sentenced. Because the language of the relevant provision has not changed, we
cite to the current version of the statute.

                                                 3
No. 57554-0-II

        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.

                                                    PRICE, J.
 We concur:

 MAXA, P.J.

 CHE, J.

                                                4