Wash. Rev. Code » Title 10 · Chapter 10.97
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 10.97.080 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
All criminal justice agencies shall permit an individual who is, or who believes that he or she may be, the subject of a criminal record maintained by that agency, to appear in person during normal business hours of that criminal justice agency and request to see the criminal history record information held by that agency pertaining to the individual. The individual's right to access and review of criminal history record information shall not extend to data contained in intelligence, investigative, or other related files, and shall not be construed to include any information other than that defined as criminal history record information by this chapter.
Every criminal justice agency shall adopt rules and make available forms to facilitate the inspection and review of criminal history record information by the subjects thereof, which rules may include requirements for identification, the establishment of reasonable periods of time to be allowed an individual to examine the record, and for assistance by an individual's counsel, interpreter, or other appropriate persons.
No person shall be allowed to retain or mechanically reproduce any nonconviction data except for the person who is the subject of the record. Such person may retain a copy of their personal nonconviction data information on file, if the criminal justice agency has verified the identities of those who seek to inspect them. Criminal justice agencies may impose such additional restrictions, including fingerprinting, as are reasonably necessary both to assure the record's security and to verify the identities of those who seek to inspect them. The criminal justice agency may charge a reasonable fee for fingerprinting or providing a copy of the personal nonconviction data information pursuant to this section. The provisions of chapter 42.56 RCW shall not be construed to require or authorize copying of nonconviction data for any other purpose.
The Washington state patrol shall establish rules for the challenge of records which an individual declares to be inaccurate or incomplete, and for the resolution of any disputes between individuals and criminal justice agencies pertaining to the accuracy and completeness of criminal history record information. The Washington state patrol shall also adopt rules for the correction of criminal history record information and the dissemination of corrected information to agencies and persons to whom inaccurate or incomplete information was previously disseminated. Such rules may establish time limitations of not less than ninety days upon the requirement for disseminating corrected information.
[ 2012 c 125 s 3; 2010 c 8 s 1093; 2005 c 274 s 206; 1979 ex.s. c 36 s 3; 1977 ex.s. c 314 s 8.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases, 1987–2020 · leading case: Bainbridge Police Guild v. City of Puyallup, 259 P.3d 190 (Wash. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bainbridge Police Guild v. City of Puyallup, 259 P.3d 190 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 8× “RCW 10.97.080 states in pertinent part: No person shall be allowed to retain or mechanically reproduce any nonconviction data except for the purpose of challenge or correction when the person who is the subject of the record asserts the belief in writing that the information…”
Bainbridge Island Police Guild v. City of Puyallup, 172 Wash. 2d 398 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 8× “RCW 10.97.080 states in pertinent part: No person shall be allowed to retain or mechanically reproduce any nonconviction data except for the purpose of challenge or correction when the person who is the subject of the record asserts the belief in writing that the information…”
Limstrom v. Ladenburg, 963 P.2d 869 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 3× “RCW 10.97.080. The record on review does not include the information which the prosecutor claims is exempt from disclosure under RCW 10.”
Sargent v. Seattle Police Dept., 314 P.3d 1093 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 2× “” Former RCW 10.97.080 (2010). 1 “Nonconviction data,” furthermore, is defined as “all criminal history record information relating to an incident which has not led to a conviction or other disposition adverse to the subject, and for which proceedings are no longer actively…”
Limstrom v. Ladenburg, 39 P.3d 351 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “*138 E — Documents withheld pursuant to the protection of RCW 10.97.080. F — Documents withheld for reasons other than the above five reasons given.”
James v. Adams v. Washington State Dept Of Corr., 361 P.3d 749 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “050 and RCW 10.97.080, and DOC employees feared they would violate the agency’s user agreement with the patrol and lose access to information if the DOC did not abide by the patrol’s interpretation.”
Limstrom v. Ladenburg, 39 P.3d 351 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “E—Documents withheld pursuant to the protection of RCW 10.97.080. F—Documents withheld for reasons other than the above five reasons given.”
Bini v. City of Vancouver, 218 F. Supp. 3d 1196 (W.D. Wash. 2016). “RCW 10.97.080. It also prohibits criminal justice agencies from disseminating “criminal history record information” unless the record also states the disposition of the charge when the request for information was made.”
Hudgens v. City of Renton, 746 P.2d 320 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 9× “Warren advising him that RCW 10.97.080 specifically excluded applicability of the public disclosure act, RCW 42.”
Sargent v. Seattle Police Deparment, 167 Wash. App. 1 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “RCW 10.97.080. Id. Clerk’s Papers at 125.”
Limstrom v. Ladenburg, 933 P.2d 1055 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “” 3 RCW 10.97.080 provides in part: "No person shall be allowed to retain or mechanically reproduce any nonconviction data except for the purpose of challenge or correction when the person who is the subject of the record asserts the belief in writing that the information…”
Beltran v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 989 P.2d 604 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “The Hudgens court permitted viewing of nonconviction data, but sustained the trial court’s decision to prohibit copying or retaining the documents: “The statute [RCW 10.97.080] clearly states (1) that nonconviction information cannot be retained or mechanically reproduced,…”
Show all 17 citing cases →
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.