State v. Carrier, 6226-7-II

• Citation: 677 P.2d 768,36 Wn.App. 755
• Decision Date: 29 February 1984
• Docket Number: No. 6226-7-II,6226-7-II
• Court: Court of Appeals of Washington
• Parties: The STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Anita J. CARRIER, Appellant.

Page 755

36 Wn.App. 755

677 P.2d 768

The STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Anita J. CARRIER, Appellant.

No. 6226-7-II.

Court of Appeals of Washington,

Division 2.

Feb. 29, 1984.

Stephen C. Hemmen, Tacoma, for appellant.

Christine Quinn-Brintnall, Deputy Pros. Atty., Tacoma, for respondent.

PETRIE, Judge.

By an amended information, Anita J. Carrier was charged on July 28, 1981 with the crime of theft in the first degree by welfare fraud, RCW 74.08.331, committed between November 1, 1976 and February 28, 1981. On September 16, she moved to strike from the information any allegation of a theft which occurred more than three years before the commencement of this action. Though we have not been favored with any written order denying this motion, the record reveals findings of fact and conclusions of law indicating that welfare theft is a single, on-going offense which is not complete until the last unlawful payment is made. Those findings and conclusions were signed by the court on February 18, 1982.

In the meantime, on November 18, 1981, Ms. Carrier entered a plea of guilty to the amended information.

The trial court accepted her plea of guilty; and, on the same day, deferred imposition of sentence for 10 years and imposed, as one of the conditions of probation, that she pay full restitution, the amount of which would be set by future order of the court. On March 22, 1982 the court entered an order setting the amount of restitution at $10,665.80. On March 19, 1982, Ms. Carrier appealed from the order suspending imposition of sentence and from "the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law denying Motion for Partial Dismissal" entered February 18, 1982.

In the case at bench, Ms. Carrier's appeal, challenging the sufficiency of the information, appears to have several facets: (1) the 3-year statute of limitations precludes the State from prosecuting her for any theft which occurred more than three years "after the commission of the offense," RCW 9A.04.080; (2) each time she accepted and cashed a welfare check she committed a separate offense, which offenses cannot be aggregated so as to increase the degree of the crime to first degree theft in an amount in excess of $1,500; and, (3) in any event, whatever crimes she committed more than three years before the State filed the original information, April 17, 1981, are barred by the statute of limitations.

In State v. Vining, 2 Wash.App. 802, 472 P.2d 564 (1970), we approved a charge in which the State aggregated a series of petit larcenies committed over a protracted period of time so as to allege the commission of the crime of grand larceny. In Vining, 2 Wash.App. 808-09, 472 P.2d 564, we held:

Where property is stolen from the same owner and from the same place by a series of acts there may be a series of crimes or there may be a single crime, depending upon the facts...