State Of Washington, Respondent V Bradley Wayne Hamrick, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION II
STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 54222-6-II
Respondent,
v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION
BRADLEY WAYNE HAMRICK,
Appellant.
MAXA, J. – Bradley Hamrick appeals his conviction of unlawful possession of a
controlled substance, methamphetamine. After he filed his notice of appeal, the Supreme Court
decided State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170, 481 P.3d 521 (2021). In Blake, the court held that
Washington’s strict liability drug possession statute, RCW 69.50.4013(1), violates state and
federal due process clauses and therefore is void. 197 Wn.2d at 195. Hamrick filed a motion to
reverse and remand in light of Blake. The State responded that the trial court had already
vacated the conviction at the State’s request. The matter was then stayed by this court until
Blake mandated. Blake mandated on April 21, 2021. This court then set the matter on the
docket.
As a result of the Supreme Court’s holding in Blake, any conviction based on RCW
69.50.4013(1) is invalid and anyone who has been convicted under that statute is entitled to have
their conviction vacated. State v. LaBounty, 17 Wn. App. 2d 576, 581, 487 P.3d 221 (2021).
Filed
Washington State
Court of Appeals
Division Two
November 2, 2021

No. 54222-6-II
2
Therefore, the trial court properly vacated Hamrick’s conviction for unlawful possession of a
controlled substance.
Because there is no further relief we can provide, this matter is now moot. State v.
Ingram, 9 Wn. App. 2d 482, 490, 447 P.3d 192 (2019), review denied¸ 194 Wn.2d 1024 (2020).
The proper recourse in this circumstance is to dismiss the appeal. See State v. Calhoun, 163 Wn.
App. 153, 168, 257 P.3d 693 (2011).
We dismiss Hamrick’s appeal as moot.
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.
MAXA, J.
We concur:
LEE, C.J.
PRICE, J.