Wash. Rev. Code » Title 10 · Chapter 10.27
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 10.27.130 (2026)

Self-incrimination—Refusal to testify or give evidence—Procedure

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
If in any proceedings before a grand jury or special inquiry judge, a person refuses, or indicates in advance a refusal, to testify or provide evidence of any other kind on the ground that he or she may be incriminated thereby, and if a public attorney requests the court to order that person to testify or provide the evidence, the court shall then hold a hearing and shall so order unless it finds that to do so would be clearly contrary to the public interest, and that person shall comply with the order. The hearing shall be subject to the provisions of RCW 10.27.080 and 10.27.090, unless the witness shall request that the hearing be public.
If, but for this section, he or she would have been privileged to withhold the answer given or the evidence produced by him or her, the witness may not refuse to comply with the order on the basis of his or her privilege against self-incrimination; but he or she shall not be prosecuted or subjected to criminal penalty or forfeiture for or on account of any transaction, matter, or fact concerning which he or she has been ordered to testify pursuant to this section. He or she may nevertheless be prosecuted for failing to comply with the order to answer, or for perjury or for offering false evidence to the grand jury.
[ 2010 c 8 s 1024; 1971 ex.s. c 67 s 13.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1973–2019 · leading case: State v. Carroll, 515 P.2d 1299 (Wash. 1973).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Carroll, 515 P.2d 1299 (Wash. 1973). · cites it 10× “090, the immunity statutes here involved, apply to respondents' testimony before a grand jury? (2) Must an individual testifying pursuant to such statutes first claim his privilege against self-incrimination, guaranteed by the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution,…”
State of Washington v. Runions, 649 P.2d 144 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 8× “Examination of such legislative history as can be found concerning the grand jury statute (RCW 10.27.130) upon which the rule was modeled discloses nothing helpful.”
State v. Bryant, 983 P.2d 1181 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “Because Bryant’s constitutional right against self-incrimination was not implicated, and because use and derivative use immunity is not statutorily authorized in Washington, Bryant’s agreement should be interpreted using “ordinary contract principles.”
State v. Harville, 518 P.2d 730 (Wash. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 9× “The attorney may be present during all proceedings attended by his client unless immunity has been granted pursuant to RCW 10.27.130. After immunity has been granted, such an individual may leave the grand jury room to confer with his attorney.”
In Re Dependency Of : A.m-s., Dob: 12/17/08, Sergio Michel-garcia, Pet v. State Of Wa, Resp, 454 P.3d 117 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “The legislature later extended this statutory transactional immunity to testimony before grand juries and special -18- No.”
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.