Wash. Rev. Code » Title 10 · Chapter 10.105
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 10.105.010 (2025)

Seizure and forfeiture

✓ laws through the 2025 session: 2026 session laws are not yet included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) The following are subject to seizure and forfeiture and no property right exists in them: All personal property, including, but not limited to, any item, object, tool, substance, device, weapon, machine, vehicle of any kind, money, security, or negotiable instrument, which has been or was actually employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of any felony, or which was furnished or was intended to be furnished by any person in the commission of, as a result of, or as compensation for the commission of, any felony, or which was acquired in whole or in part with proceeds traceable to the commission of a felony. No property may be forfeited under this section until after there has been a superior court conviction of the owner of the property for the felony in connection with which the property was employed, furnished, or acquired.
A forfeiture of property encumbered by a bona fide security interest is subject to the interest of the secured party if at the time the security interest was created, the secured party neither had knowledge of nor consented to the commission of the felony.
(2) Personal property subject to forfeiture under this chapter may be seized by any law enforcement officer of this state upon process issued by any superior court having jurisdiction over the property. Seizure of personal property without process may be made if:
(a) The seizure is incident to an arrest or a search under a search warrant;
(b) The property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding;
(c) A law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that the property is directly dangerous to health or safety; or
(d) The law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that the property was used or is intended to be used in the commission of a felony.
(3) In the event of seizure pursuant to this section, proceedings for forfeiture are governed by chapter 7.120 RCW.
(4) When property is seized under this chapter and forfeited pursuant to chapter 7.120 RCW, the seizing agency must use or dispose of the property as permitted under RCW 7.120.040.
[ 2025 c 306 s 9; 2022 c 162 s 3; 2009 c 479 s 15; 1993 c 288 s 2.]

Notes:

Application—Effective date—2025 c 306: See notes following RCW 7.120.010.
Effective date—2022 c 162: See note following RCW 69.50.505.
Effective date—2009 c 479: See note following RCW 2.56.030.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2014–2025 · leading case: State v. Richards, 559 P.3d 107 (Wash. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Richards, 559 P.3d 107 (Wash. 2024). · cites it 2× “505 (authorizing the seizure and forfeiture of property related to the manufacture of controlled substances); RCW 10.105.010 (authorizing the forfeiture of property used as an instrumentality in the commission of a felony).”
Youker v. Hillhouse, No. 2:19-cv-00177 (E.D. Wash. Feb. 19, 2021). · cites it 8× “1 Defendants argue that Plaintiff was provided adequate process pursuant to 2 RCW 10.105.010, a Washington statute providing for forfeiture of personal 3 property.”
State Of Washington v. Michael John Trevino, No. 47613-4 (Wash. Ct. App. July 12, 2016). · cites it 7× “The record does not indicate that the State cited any authority to the sentencing court to authorize the forfeiture provision; however, on appeal the State now cites RCW 10.105.010 as the authority for the forfeiture provision.”
State Of Washington, V. Michiel Glen Oakes, No. 86806-3 (Wash. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2025). · cites it 5× “Oakes 931: RCW 10.105.010 and the doctrine of unclean hands.”
State Of Washington v. Rafael Meza, 364 P.3d 1081 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “010(1), money obtained as a result of any felony is “subject to seizure and forfeiture,’’ although “[n]o property may be forfeited under this section until after there has been a superior court conviction of the owner of the *857 property for the felony in connection with which…”
State Of Washington v. Layne E. Huber, No. 79661-5 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 12, 2019). “Huber next contends that TCSO’s continued retention of the seized property constitutes a de facto—and unconstitutional—forfeiture. Specifically, he argues that CrR 2.”
State v. Davis, No. 89448-5 (Wash. Dec. 24, 2014). “RCW 10.105.010- which forfeits property used to aid or abet in the commission of a felony-applies only to personal property, not real property.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 10.105.010(1): 4 cases
State Of Washington v. Rafael Meza, 364 P.3d 1081 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “010(1), money obtained as a result of any felony is “subject to seizure and forfeiture,’’ although “[n]o property may be forfeited under this section until after there has been a superior court conviction of the owner of the *857 property for the felony in connection with which…”
State Of Washington v. Michael John Trevino, No. 47613-4 (Wash. Ct. App. July 12, 2016). “The record does not indicate that the State cited any authority to the sentencing court to authorize the forfeiture provision; however, on appeal the State now cites RCW 10.105.010 as the authority for the forfeiture provision.”
Youker v. Hillhouse, No. 2:19-cv-00177 (E.D. Wash. Feb. 19, 2021). “1 Defendants argue that Plaintiff was provided adequate process pursuant to 2 RCW 10.105.010, a Washington statute providing for forfeiture of personal 3 property.”
State Of Washington, V. Michiel Glen Oakes, No. 86806-3 (Wash. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2025). “Oakes 931: RCW 10.105.010 and the doctrine of unclean hands.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 10.105.010(3): 3 cases
State v. Richards, 559 P.3d 107 (Wash. 2024). “505 (authorizing the seizure and forfeiture of property related to the manufacture of controlled substances); RCW 10.105.010 (authorizing the forfeiture of property used as an instrumentality in the commission of a felony).”
State Of Washington v. Michael John Trevino, No. 47613-4 (Wash. Ct. App. July 12, 2016). “The record does not indicate that the State cited any authority to the sentencing court to authorize the forfeiture provision; however, on appeal the State now cites RCW 10.105.010 as the authority for the forfeiture provision.”
Youker v. Hillhouse, No. 2:19-cv-00177 (E.D. Wash. Feb. 19, 2021). “1 Defendants argue that Plaintiff was provided adequate process pursuant to 2 RCW 10.105.010, a Washington statute providing for forfeiture of personal 3 property.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 10.105.010(4): 1 case
Youker v. Hillhouse, No. 2:19-cv-00177 (E.D. Wash. Feb. 19, 2021). “1 Defendants argue that Plaintiff was provided adequate process pursuant to 2 RCW 10.105.010, a Washington statute providing for forfeiture of personal 3 property.”
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.