Wash. Rev. Code » Title 3 · Chapter 3.66
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.060 (2026)

Criminal jurisdiction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The district court shall have jurisdiction: (1) Concurrent with the superior court of all misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors committed in their respective counties and of all violations of city ordinances. It shall in no event impose a greater punishment than a fine of five thousand dollars, or imprisonment for one year in the county or city jail as the case may be, or both such fine and imprisonment, unless otherwise expressly provided by statute. It may suspend and revoke vehicle operators' licenses in the cases provided by law; (2) to sit as a committing magistrate and conduct preliminary hearings in cases provided by law; (3) concurrent with the superior court of a proceeding to keep the peace in their respective counties; (4) concurrent with the superior court of all violations under Title 77 RCW; (5) to hear and determine traffic infractions under chapter 46.63 RCW; and (6) to take recognizance, approve bail, and arraign defendants held within its jurisdiction on warrants issued by other courts of limited jurisdiction when those courts are participating in the program established under RCW 2.56.160.
[ 2003 c 39 s 1; 2000 c 111 s 3; 1984 c 258 s 44; 1983 1st ex.s. c 46 s 176; 1982 c 150 s 1; 1961 c 299 s 117.]

Notes:

Court Improvement Act of 1984—Effective dates—Severability—Short title—1984 c 258: See notes following RCW 3.30.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case: State v. Granath, 415 P.3d 1179 (Wash. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Granath, 415 P.3d 1179 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 6× “The affirmative grant of subject matter jurisdiction in this case is RCW 3.66.060. It provides a district courtjurisdiction that is "[cjoncurrent with 'At oral argument, Granath asserted that this case is moot because Granath's no-contact order expired in November 2017.”
Mortell v. State, 118 Wash. App. 846 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 9× “We hold that RCW 3.66.060, which provides for the criminal jurisdiction of district court, is *848 ambiguous as to whether the district court can impose a sentence for longer than one year at a single sentencing.”
State v. Elgin, 825 P.2d 314 (Wash. 1992). · cites it 4× “In the second, the Legislature authorizes a suspended term of 180 days "in addition to" the mandatory sentence described in the first paragraph.”
State Of Washington v. David E. Bliss, 365 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 8× “¶20 RCW 3.66.060 governs the district court’s criminal jurisdiction.”
City of Medina v. Primm, 157 P.3d 379 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 4× “¶12 Under the legislation, a city with a population of less than 400,000 may elect to either file cases in district court pursuant to RCW 3.66.060, petition for the establishment of a municipal department in the district court pursuant to chapter 3.”
Exendine v. City of Sammamish, 113 P.3d 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “RCW 3.66.060 grants district courts jurisdiction to issue search warrants for misdemeanor violations of city ordinances.”
Exendine v. City of Sammamish, 113 P.3d 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “RCW 3.66.060 grants district courts jurisdiction to issue search warrants for misdemeanor violations of city ordinances.”
State v. Stock, 722 P.2d 1330 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 3× “" 4 The Legislature enacted former RCW 3.66.060, 5 which provides in part: "The justice court shall have jurisdiction: .”
State v. Slattum, 295 P.3d 788 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “For example, RCW 3.66.060, which governs district courts’ criminal jurisdiction, provides in part: The district court shall have jurisdiction: (1) Concurrent with the superior court of all misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors committed in their respective counties and of all…”
State v. Anderson, 151 Wash. App. 396 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “For example, RCW 3.66.060, which governs criminal jurisdiction of district courts, provides: The district court shall have jurisdiction: (1) Concurrent with the superior court of all misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors committed in their respective counties and of all violations…”
State v. Anderson, 212 P.3d 591 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “For example, RCW 3.66.060, which governs criminal jurisdiction of district courts, provides: The district court shall have jurisdiction: (1) Concurrent with the superior court of all misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors committed in their respective counties and of all violations…”
Avlonitis v. Seattle Dist. Court, 646 P.2d 128 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 2× “" RCW 3.66.060. It is, however, limited to imposing a punishment not greater than a "fine of five hundred dollars, or imprisonment for six months .”
Show all 46 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.060(1) — 6 cases
State v. Elgin, 825 P.2d 314 (Wash. 1992). “In the second, the Legislature authorizes a suspended term of 180 days "in addition to" the mandatory sentence described in the first paragraph.”
State v. Richards, 559 P.3d 107 (Wash. 2024).
City of Spokane v. Rothwell, 166 Wash. 2d 872 (Wash. 2009).
State v. Jennings, 728 P.2d 1064 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986).
State of Washington v. Stevens Cnty. Dist. Court Judge, 436 P.3d 430 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.060(2) — 3 cases
State Of Washington v. David E. Bliss, 365 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “¶20 RCW 3.66.060 governs the district court’s criminal jurisdiction.”
State of Washington v. Dahndre Kavaugn Westwood, 448 P.3d 771 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Stevens Cnty. Dist. Court Judge (Wash. 2019).
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.