Court Opinion

ID: 9947888
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-05 20:18:28.764192+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:28:43.816304
License: Public Domain

Filed
                                                                                      Washington State
                                                                                      Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Division Two

                                                                                       March 5, 2024

    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

                                       DIVISION II
 STATE OF WASHINGTON                                              No. 57557-4-II

                        Respondent,

        v.
                                                            UNPUBLISHED OPINION
 SAMANTHA JEWELL EAZOR,

                        Appellant.

       PRICE, J. — Samantha J. Eazor appeals her sentence imposed for her conviction for second

degree assault. Eazor argues that the superior court erred by imposing the crime victim penalty

assessment (VPA) as part of her sentence. The State does not object to remanding for the superior

court to strike the VPA. Because the VPA is no longer authorized by statute, we remand to the

superior court to strike the VPA.

                                            FACTS

       In August 2022, a jury found Eazor guilty of second degree assault and resisting arrest.

The superior court found that Eazor was indigent. As part of Eazor’s sentence, the superior court

imposed the $500 VPA.

       Eazor appeals.
                                          ANALYSIS

       Eazor argues that the VPA should be stricken because the VPA is no longer authorized by

statute. The State has no objection to remanding for the superior court to strike the VPA. We

agree the VPA should be stricken.
No. 57557-4-II

        Effective July 1, 2023, the VPA is no longer authorized for indigent defendants. LAWS OF

2023, ch. 449 § 1; RCW 7.68.035(4). And changes to the legislation governing legal financial

obligations apply to cases on direct appeal when the change was enacted. State v. Matamua,

__ Wn. App. 2d __, 539 P.3d 28, 39 (2023).

        Because the VPA is no longer authorized by statute, it should be stricken. Accordingly,

we remand to the trial court to strike the VPA.

        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:

 CRUSER, A.C.J.

 LEE, J.

                                                  2