Appeal from King County Superior Court. Docket No: 82-1-00963-2. Date filed: 11/23/2011. Judge signing: Honorable Carol a Schapira.
Casey Grannis ( Nielsen Broman & Koch PLLC ), for appellant.
Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney, and Alison M. Bogar, Deputy, for respondent.
AUTHOR: Ann Schindler, J. WE CONCUR: Marlin Appelwick, J., Mary Kay Becker, J.
[178 Wn.App. 352]
¶ 1 William Hall Carney contends that under State v. Jones, 99 Wn.2d 735, 664 P.2d 1216 (1983), he is entitled to dismissal of the 1982 conviction of arson in the first degree, the acquittal by reason of insanity and order of civil commitment, and the 2011 order revoking his conditional release. Because Jones does not apply retroactively, we affirm the decision to dismiss Carney's collateral attack of the 1982 conviction and order of commitment, and the 2011 order revoking his conditional release.
¶ 2 On March 31, 1982, police responded to a report of a disturbance at the apartment of William Hall Carney. Carney had barricaded himself inside and was fanning the flames of a fire in the apartment. Fire investigators concluded the fire was deliberately set by using a match to ignite combustible material in the apartment.
¶ 3 On April 1, 1982, the State charged Carney with arson in the first degree. On April 5, the court entered a 15-day order of commitment to the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) at Western State Hospital (WSH) to evaluate Carney and determine whether he was competent to stand trial. On April 23, a WSH psychologist reported Carney was " psychotic," " responding to auditory hallucinations," and not competent to stand trial. The court granted the request for a 90-day extension of the commitment.
¶ 4 On May 19, the WSH psychiatrist filed a report with the court stating that Carney had " slowly improved" with [178 Wn.App. 353] treatment and was competent to stand trial. The psychiatrist states Carney's paranoid schizophrenia is " now in fair remission."
[W]ith treatment Mr. Carney's condition has slowly improved and he is now more cooperative, coherent and rational. He has a lengthy history of psychiatric treatment at numerous mental facilities. Our diagnostic impression continues to be Schizophrenia, chronic, paranoid type[,] now in fair remission.
It is our opinion that Mr. Carney has regained competency to stand trial. He now fully understands the nature of the proceedings against him and is able to assist his attorney in preparing a defense.
¶ 5 On June 4, the court found Carney competent to stand trial. Following arraignment on the charge of arson in the first degree, Carney entered a plea of not guilty.
¶ 6 At the beginning of the jury trial on July 2, the State asked the court to enter a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity on behalf of Carney. Carney did not object. The court granted the motion.
¶ 7 The State called a number of witnesses to testify at trial, including police officers and two psychiatrists. At the conclusion of the State's case, the defense moved to withdraw the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. The court denied the motion. Carney testified in his defense.
¶ 8 In answer to a special verdict form, the jury found Carney committed the crime of arson in the first degree but found him " not guilty because of insanity existing at the time of the act charged." The jury also found Carney was " a substantial danger to other persons" and " present[ed] a substantial likelihood of committing felonious acts jeopardizing public safety or security unless kept under further control by the court or other persons or institutions."
¶ 9 At the sentencing on July 9, the court entered an order of acquittal by reason of insanity and an order of commitment. The findings state that when Carney committed the crime of arson in the first degree, he " was affected [178 Wn.App. 354] by mental disease or defect to such an extent that he was unable to perceive the nature and quality of the act with which he is charged and unable to tell right from wrong." The findings also state that Carney " is a substantial danger to other persons" and presented a substantial likelihood of committing acts jeopardizing public safety. The order of commitment remands Carney " to the custody of [DSHS] for hospitalization at such place as shall be designated for the care and treatment of the criminally insane."
¶ 10 The court advised Carney that he had the right to appeal the order of acquittal by
reason of insanity and order of commitment. Carney signed and acknowledged receipt of the " Certificate of Compliance with Rule 7.1(b) CrR Rule for Superior Court." The certificate states that unless a written notice of appeal is filed within 30 days of entry of the order of acquittal and commitment, " the right of ...