Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 10.101.030 (2026)
Standards
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Each county or city under this chapter shall adopt standards for the delivery of public defense services, whether those services are provided by contract, assigned counsel, or a public defender office. Standards shall include the following: Compensation of counsel, duties and responsibilities of counsel, case load limits and types of cases, responsibility for expert witness fees and other costs associated with representation, administrative expenses, support services, reports of attorney activity and vouchers, training, supervision, monitoring and evaluation of attorneys, substitution of attorneys or assignment of contracts, limitations on private practice of contract attorneys, qualifications of attorneys, disposition of client complaints, cause for termination of contract or removal of attorney, and nondiscrimination. The standards endorsed by the Washington state bar association for the provision of public defense services should serve as guidelines to local legislative authorities in adopting standards.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: State v. ANJ, 225 P.3d 956 (Wash. 2010).
State v. ANJ, 225 P.3d 956 (Wash. 2010). “RCW 10.101.030; see also WASH. STATE BAR ASS'N, STANDARDS FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES (Sept.”
State v. A.N.J., 168 Wash. 2d 91 (Wash. 2010). “RCW 10.101.030; see also Wash. State Bar Ass’n, Standards for Indigent Defense Services (Sept.”
Davison v. State, 466 P.3d 231 (Wash. 2020). “These standards must include: [c]ompensation of counsel, duties and responsibilities of counsel, case load limits and types of cases, responsibility for expert witness fees and other costs associated with representation, administrative expenses, support services, reports of…”
Matter of Disciplinary Proceeding Against Michels, 75 P.3d 950 (Wash. 2003). “[2] RCW 10.101.030 further outlines the standards a county or city operating a criminal court shall incorporate into a public defender contract or office.”
In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Michels, 150 Wash. 2d 159 (Wash. 2003). “RCW 10.101.030 further outlines the standards a county or city operating a criminal court shall incorporate into a public defender contract or office.”
City of Mount Vernon v. Weston, 844 P.2d 438 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). “See RCW 10.101.030 (standards endorsed by Washington State Bar Association may serve as guidelines for counties and cities contracting for public defense services).”
Washington State Assoc. Of Counties, V. State Of Washington (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “RCW 10.101.030. No. 60179-6-II Washington State Association of Counties,1 Lincoln County, Pacific County, and Yakima County (collectively “the Counties”) have brought this action against the State claiming that the funding system for indigent defense services is unconstitutional.”
In re Det. of M.E. (Wash. 2026). “” RCW 10.101.030; KING COUNTY CODE 2.60.026(A)(5).”
State Of Washington v. Ray Castillo (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “LFOs Here, the trial court found that Castillo was indigent pursuant to RCW 10.101.030(3). And the trial court entered an order of indigency for the purposes of this appeal.”
State of Washington v. Treyton X.L. Mooneyham (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “should serve as guidelines to local authorities in adopting their own [set of] standards.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 10.101.030(3) — 1 case
State Of Washington v. Ray Castillo (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “LFOs Here, the trial court found that Castillo was indigent pursuant to RCW 10.101.030(3). And the trial court entered an order of indigency for the purposes of this appeal.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.