State of Washington v. Monty Ray Bockman ( 2021 )

FILED
FEBRUARY 4, 2021
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
STATE OF WASHINGTON, )
) No. 37011-9-III
Respondent, )
)
v. )
)
MONTY RAY BOCKMAN, ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION
)
Appellant. )
KORSMO, J.P.T.1 — Monty Bockman appeals from a conviction for possession of
methamphetamine, challenging aspects of his judgment and sentence. We affirm the
conviction and remand to correct the judgment.
FACTS
Although discussion of the underlying incident is unnecessary to resolution of the
challenges presented by the appeal, Mr. Bockman also filed a statement of additional
grounds (SAG) that suggests brief consideration of the facts is in order. The charge arose
after a Kennewick Police Department Officer, Craig Hanson, arrested Mr. Bockman. A
search incident to the arrest discovered two pipes in Mr. Bockman’s coat pocket.
1
Judge Kevin M. Korsmo was a member of the Court of Appeals at the time
argument was held on this matter. He is now serving as a judge pro tempore of the court
pursuant to RCW 2.06.150.
No. 37011-9-III
State v. Bockman
The parties stipulated to the facts of the arrest at a CrR 3.6 hearing and the court
found the evidence admissible. A laboratory technician testified that her analysis
established that methamphetamine residue was present on the pipes. Officer Hanson and
the technician were the sole witnesses at the brief jury trial. The jury found Mr.
Bockman guilty as charged.
After the court imposed a low-end standard range sentence, Mr. Bockman timely
appealed to this court. A panel heard the case without conducting argument.
ANALYSIS
The appeal raises two technical challenges to the judgment and sentence; the State
concedes, properly, both challenges. The assessment of community supervision fees
should be struck from the judgment and sentence. Likewise, that document should be
corrected to indicate that the offense date was January 12, 2019, rather than the earlier
date currently listed.
The SAG raises three factual challenges and one legal challenge. The factual
challenges—that Officer Hanson allegedly is not a certified officer, that the forensic
scientist was not a forensic scientist, and that a federal judge should preside over the
trial—are not supported by the record. Any remedy for these alleged errors would have
to come in a personal restraint petition that includes supporting evidence for the
allegations as well as legal argument. State v. Norman, 61 Wn. App. 16, 27-28, 808 P.2d
1159 (1991).
2
No. 37011-9-III
State v. Bockman
The other SAG challenge alleges that the case was filed at the Benton County
Justice Center in Kennewick instead of at the county courthouse in Prosser. Benton
County is permitted to maintain clerk’s offices in both locations. Staples v. Benton
County ex rel. Bd. of Com’rs., 151 Wn.2d 460, 89 P.3d 706 (2004). This claim is without
merit.
The conviction is affirmed and the case remanded to make the noted corrections.
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.
_________________________________
Korsmo, J.P.T.
WE CONCUR:
_________________________________
Lawrence-Berrey, J.
_________________________________
Pennell, C.J.
3