State Of Washington, Respondent. V. Dominic David Wilson, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent.
v.
DOMINIC DAVID WILSON,
Appellant.
No. 85230-2-I
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
P ER CURIAM — Dominic Wilson appeals from the judgment and sentence entered
upon his plea of guilty to one count of murder in the second degree while armed with a
firearm—an offense he committed at age 16. 	He argues that the trial court, which
sentenced Wilson to an adult standard-range sentence above what the parties jointly
recommended, erred by not giving meaningful consideration to his youth at the time of
his offense. 	The State acknowledges that “there is no indication in the record how the
defendant’s youthfulness impacted the court’s [sentencing] decision.” 	It thus concedes
that the matter should be remanded for resentencing.
We accept the State’s concession. 	Cf. State v. Houston-Sconiers, 188 Wn.2d 1,
21, 23, 391 P.3d 409 (2017) (court sentencing juvenile must consider mitigating
circumstances related to the defendant’s youth; it must also consider factors “like the
nature of the juvenile’s surrounding environment and family circumstances, the extent of
the juvenile’s participation in the crime, . . . ‘the way familial and peer pressures may
have affected him [or her],’ . . . [and] how youth impacted any legal defense, along with

No. 852302-I/2
-2-
any factors suggesting that the child might be successfully rehabilitated” (second
alteration in original) (quoting Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 477-78, 132 S. Ct. 2455,
183 L. Ed. 2d 407 (2012))). 	Accordingly, we reverse Wilson’s sentence and remand to
the trial court for resentencing. Cf. In re Pers. Restraint of Carrasco, 1 Wn.3d 224, 230,
525 P.3d 196 (2023) (“On direct appeal, the defendant needs only to establish the
existence of [a] Houston-Sconiers error to be entitled to a new sentencing hearing.”).
Reversed and remanded.
FOR THE COURT: