State Of Washington, Respondent V. Kyrstin Woodcock, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION II
STATE OF WASHINGTON No. 53983-7-II
Respondent,
v.
KYRSTIN WOODCOCK, UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appellant.
WORSWICK, J. — Kyrstin Woodcock appeals her conviction for possession of a
controlled substance. Woodcock argues that her conviction is unconstitutional based on our
Supreme Court’s opinion in State v. Blake.1 Because our Supreme Court has held that
Washington’s possession of a controlled substance statute is unconstitutional, we reverse
Woodcock’s conviction for possession of a controlled substance—methamphetamine and
remand to the trial court to vacate the conviction.
FACTS
On December 13, 2018, the State charged Woodcock with possession of a controlled
substance—methamphetamine. A jury found Woodcock guilty as charged. The trial court
imposed a standard range sentence of nine days.
Woodcock appeals her conviction.
1 State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170, 481 P.3d 521 (2021).
Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
May 18, 2021

No. 53983-7-II
2
ANALYSIS
Woodcock argues that we should reverse her conviction for possession of a controlled
substance—methamphetamine because the statute criminalizing possession of a controlled
substance is unconstitutional. We agree.
In Blake, our Supreme Court held that RCW 69.50.4013(1), the statute criminalizing
simple possession, is unconstitutional. 197 Wn.2d at 173. Therefore, the statute is void. Blake,
197 Wn.2d at 195. Because RCW 69.50.4013(1) is void, Woodcock has not been convicted of
any crime and her judgment and sentence is invalid. See In re Pers. Restraint of Hinton, 152
Wn.2d 853, 857-58, 100 P.3d 801 (2004). Accordingly, we reverse Woodcock’s conviction for
possession of a controlled substance—methamphetamine.
We reverse and remand to the trial court to vacate Woodcock’s conviction for possession
of a controlled substance—methamphetamine.
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.
Worswick, J.
We concur:
Lee, C.J.
Cruser, J.