All individuals convicted of a crime have the right to appeal their convictions, but they also have the ability to challenge their convictions through a Personal Restraint Petition, or PRP. A Personal Restraint Petition allows a convicted person to argue that their conviction or sentence is unlawful and allows them to submit new evidence in the process. A PRP is typically filed in the Court of Appeals, where the court will grant the petition if the convicted person shows they are under some form of “restraint” and the restraint is “unlawful.” The primary form of “restraint” for purposes of filing a PRP includes being in custody, but a petitioner may also be under a “restraint” if they have limited freedom, are subject to imminent confinement, or are under some other disability resulting from a judgment in a criminal case. A person’s restraint may be “unlawful” for any one or more of the following reasons:
· The court lacked jurisdiction;
· The conviction or sentence was obtained or imposed in violation of the Constitution or another law;
· There was evidence that was not presented that should have been presented;
· There has been a significant change in the law that applies retroactively;
· The conditions of confinement violate the Constitution or other laws; or
· If “other grounds” exist to challenge the conviction.
A Personal Restraint Petition differs from a direct appeal in that a PRP is broader and can apply to any type of official restraint such as involuntary confinement to a mental institution or treatment facility. Additionally, a Personal Restraint Petition allows one to submit new evidence that was not presented at trial or during appeal. A common claim made in a PRP is inefficient assistance of counsel, where a convicted individual may claim that their defense attorney failed to offer the court all of the evidence in the individual’s favor. Evidence of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim cannot otherwise be raised on appeal since it was not in the record from the trial court, so a PRP is an accessible avenue for incarcerated individuals to present the evidence that their lawyer should have used in trial. Another possible claim for the basis of a Personal Restraint Petition is that there was not sufficient evidence presented at trial to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
There are some limitations to filing a Personal Restraint Petition. First, the appellate court will only grant relief through a Personal Restraint Petition if other remedies which may be available to the petitioner are inadequate under the circumstances. Second, under RCW 10.73.090, a PRP must be filed within one year of the date that the conviction becomes final on direct review. However, there are some exceptions to this time requirement per RCW 10.73.100 that allow one to file a PRP after a year, including newly discovered evidence, a finding that the statute of conviction was unconstitutional, a finding that the conviction violates double jeopardy, insufficient evidence to support the conviction, or a significant change in the law that applies retroactively. No more than one petition for relief on behalf of the same petitioner will be entertained by the court unless good cause is shown. For some, a successful PRP will mean release from confinement for the imprisoned person. More often, a successful Personal Restraint Petition will mean the incarcerated person gets a new trial.
If you or a loved one is currently incarcerated or under another form of restraint following a conviction, a PRP can be filed to challenge the unlawful imprisonment. Because there is a one-year deadline to file a PRP from the date the conviction is finalized and because preparing a PRP can take several months, it is important to start on a Personal Restraint Petition sooner rather than later. Contact Lindsay Calkins today for assistance with preparing a filing a Personal Restraint Petition.