SPOKANE - Adelelmo Beltran Jr.'s challenge of his exceptional sentence handed down in a Grant County trial from last year was denied.

The Quincy man argued that the rapid recidivism factor in his exceptional sentence is unconstitutionally vague, according to a state Court of Appeals opinion released Tuesday.

Recidivism means a repeated or habitual relapse. In this case, it refers to continuing to break the law.

After being released from the Grant County Jail the previous day after completing a sentence on a third-degree assault conviction, Beltran was charged with custodial assault after he fought with community corrections officers on Feb. 9, 2011.

As part of his release from the Grant County Jail, Beltran was instructed to have zero contact with his brother, Gumaro Beltran Santos. Two corrections officers and three officers from the Quincy Police Department performed a home visit to Beltran's residence a day after he was released from jail. After answering the door, Beltran admitted to the officers that his brother was inside the house. Beltran allegedly began fighting with the corrections officers after he was told that he was under arrest.

After the altercation, Beltran was charged with two counts of third-degree assault, felony harassment, resisting arrest and violation of the no contact order. Beltran was found guilty on one count of custodial assault, resisting arrest and violating the no contact order.

The main factor of rapid recidivism is if the defendant committed the current offense shortly after being released from incarceration. Beltran argued that "shortly after" doesn't give enough information and is therefore vague.

Prosecution stated that since Beltran committed his most recent crimes within 30 hours of being released any reasonable person would consider that "shortly after."

"It is pretty rare that the trial court will impose an exceptional sentence, so that is some indication of how necessary extra prison time was," Grant County Prosecutor Angus Lee said. "It is great that the court of appeals upheld that sentence."