Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.130 (2026)

Additional names

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If for any reason the jurors drawn for service upon a jury for any term shall not be sufficient to dispose of the pending jury business, or where no jury is in regular attendance and the business of the court may require the attendance of a jury before a regular term, the judge or judges of any court may direct the random selection and summoning from the master jury list such additional names as they may consider necessary.

[ 1988 c 188 s 12; 1911 c 57 s 6; RRS s 99.]

Notes:

Legislative findings—Severability—Effective date—1988 c 188: See notes following RCW 2.36.010.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1985–1993 · leading case: State v. Ramsay, 704 P.2d 657 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Ramsay, 704 P.2d 657 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “The expiration of Ramsay's waiver imposed no "impossible burden" upon the State. Twenty-five days remained in which to reschedule the trial.”

Brady v. Fibreboard Corp., 857 P.2d 1094 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). “Two features of Washington's statutory jury selection process are pertinent to this appeal. One is randomness. The other is challenges.”

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.