In re Pers. Restraint of Snively (Majority)
Annotate this Case
In 1993 Petitioner Garth Snively pled guilty to a single count of indecent liberties and two counts of first degree child molestation. Relying on the plea agreement, the trial
court imposed two years of community placement on each conviction. But community placement was not authorized for indecent liberties at that time. Snively did not appeal, making the judgment and sentence final when it was filed in the trial court. In 2003 the State relied on the 1993 convictions in filing a petition alleging that Snively was a sexually violent predator subject to civil commitment. In 2006 a jury found Snively to be a sexually violent predator, resulting in his civil commitment. In 2010 Snively filed a personal restraint petition in the Court of Appeals, challenging the commitment by way of collaterally attacking his 1993 convictions. He claimed specifically that he was entitled to withdraw his guilty pleas due to the erroneous community placement term. The Court of Appeals allowed Garth Snively to withdraw his plea of
guilty to indecent liberties because of a facially invalid sentence. Because Snively's sole remedy for the sentencing error was correction of the judgment and sentence, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals as to that issue.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.