State Of Washington, Respondent V. Stephen Edward Hutsell, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent,
v.
STEPHEN EDWARD HUTSELL,
Appellant.
No. 74157-8-1
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION 	^
FILED: January 17, 2017
Leach, J. — Stephen Hutsell challenges the trial court's imposition of the
mandatory 	$100 	deoxyribonucleic 	acid 	(DNA) 	testing 	fee 	required 	by
RCW 43.43.7541. 	He claims the fee, as applied to a repeat felony offender,
violates equal protection. 	Our recent opinion in State v. Lewis1 considered and
rejected the same argument. We affirm.
FACTS
On May 22, 2015, the State charged Hutsell with possession of a controlled
substance (heroin). 	He pleaded guilty as charged. 	Because the State had
Hutsell's DNA on file as a result of a prior conviction, the trial court did not require
Hutsell to undergo a DNA test. 	It did, however, impose a $100 DNA testing fee.
At 	sentencing, 	Hutsell 	challenged 	the 	imposition 	of 	the 	DNA 	testing 	fee.
Concluding that a statute required the fee, the court rejected Hutsell's challenge.
Hutsell appeals.
1 194 Wn. App. 709, 379 P.3d 129 (2016), review denied. No. 93420-7
(Wash. Dec. 7, 2016).

No. 74157-8-1/2
ANALYSIS
Hutsell 	claims 	that 	the 	mandatory 	DNA 	collection 	fee 	required 	by
RCW 43.43.7541, as applied to a repeat felony offender, violates equal protection.
But in Lewis, this court considered and rejected the same challenge. We held that
a rational basis exists to impose a fee for every felony sentence because the fee
funds both the cost of collection and the costs to operate and maintain the state
DNA database.2 Following Lewis, we affirm the trial court's imposition of the DNA
testing fee.
Hutsell asks the court to waive his appellate costs. 	RAP 14.2 permits an
appellate court to bar an award of costs in a decision terminating review. 	Here,
the State states that it does not intend to request appellate costs. 	This makes
Hutsell's request moot, and we do not consider it.
CONCLUSION
We affirm.
WE CONCUR:
^ 	H-VV ) 	Jt.Alr<$Jk«,
2 Lewis, 194 Wn. App. at 719-20 (citing State v. Johnson. 194 Wn. App.
304, 307-08, 374 P.3d 1206 (2016)).
-2-