State v. Vy Thang, 2026 Wash. App. LEXIS 445 (Wash. Ct. App. 2026)

The Court of Appeals of Washington remanded a case for resentencing finding that the trial court abused its discretion by “failing to place greater emphasis on Thang’s mitigating qualities of youth during resentencing,” pursuant to the Miller decision. The court stated in relevant part:

“We agree with Thang that this analysis shows that the sentencing court balanced rehabilitation against retribution and improperly emphasized the brutal and violent nature of the offense over Thang’s demonstrated capacity for change. In a Miller-fix hearing, retribution and rehabilitation are not equal factors to be balanced against each other. While a court conducting a Miller resentencing can still consider the nature of the offense, the “retributive factors must count for less than mitigating factors.” Haag, 198 Wn.2d at 325. We conclude that the resentencing court’s focus on the brutality of the crime, its cursory treatment of youth-related features, and its balancing of mitigation against aggravation show a misapplication of the law. Accordingly, we vacate Thang’s sentence and remand for a new Miller resentencing. Following the hearing, the resentencing court should enter written findings and conclusions to facilitate appellate review.”