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

Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) A court has continuing jurisdiction and authority to suspend the execution of all or any part of its sentence upon stated terms, including installment payment of fines for a period not to exceed:
(a) Five years after imposition of sentence for a defendant sentenced for a domestic violence offense or under RCW 46.61.5055; and
(b) Two years after imposition of sentence for all other offenses.
(2)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, a court has continuing jurisdiction and authority to defer the execution of all or any part of its sentence upon stated terms, including installment payment of fines for a period not to exceed:
(i) Five years after imposition of sentence for a defendant sentenced for a domestic violence offense; and
(ii) Two years after imposition of sentence for all other offenses.
(b) A court shall not defer sentence for an offense sentenced under RCW 46.61.5055.
(3) A defendant who has been sentenced, or whose sentence has been deferred, and who then fails to appear for any hearing to address the defendant's compliance with the terms of probation when ordered to do so by the court, shall have the term of probation tolled until such time as the defendant makes his or her presence known to the court on the record.
(4) However, the court's jurisdiction period in this section does not apply to the enforcement of orders issued under RCW 46.20.720.
(5) For the purposes of this section, "domestic violence offense" means a crime listed in RCW 10.99.020 that is not a felony offense.
[ 2013 2nd sp.s. c 35 s 4; 2010 c 274 s 405; 2001 c 94 s 2; 1999 c 56 s 2; 1983 c 156 s 2; 1969 c 75 s 2.]

Notes:

Intent—2010 c 274: See note following RCW 10.31.100.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2023 · 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 16× “Our conclusion does not prohibit a district court from issuing a five year no- contact order, which is the longest a district court can retain jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 3.”
Smith v. Whatcom Cnty. Dist. Court, 52 P.3d 485 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 13× “The superior court granted a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that former RCW 3.66.068 (1999) limits the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction to jail a defendant for nonpayment of fines to a period of two years after a conviction.”
Smith v. Whatcom Cnty. Dist. Court, 52 P.3d 485 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 13× “Although we hold that former RCW 3.66.068 (1999) does not apply to this case, we nevertheless hold that the district court's exercise of its jurisdiction did not comport with due process.”
City of Spokane v. Marquette, 43 P.3d 502 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 10× “Former RCW 3.66.068 (1983) (emphasis added). The statute limits the court's probation power to two years, but judicial construction has permitted tolling in certain situations.”
City of Spokane v. Marquette, 146 Wash. 2d 124 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 10× “Former RCW 3.66.068 (1983) (emphasis added). The statute limits the court’s probation power to two years, but judicial construction has permitted tolling in certain situations.”
Avlonitis v. Seattle Dist. Court, 646 P.2d 128 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 7× “067, or to suspend the execution of all or any part of his sentence for a period not to exceed 1 year following imposition *134 of sentence, RCW 3.66.068. The Legislature also provided for the revocation of deferred or suspended sentences in the event a defendant should violate…”
State v. Deskins, 322 P.3d 780 (Wash. 2014). ““[T]he court has continuing jurisdiction and authority to suspend or defer the execution of all or any part of its sentence upon stated terms, including installment payment of fines.”
Wahleithner v. Thompson, 134 Wash. App. 931 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “¶21 The statutes give judges broad authority to suspend jail time in misdemeanor cases, to impose conditions upon suspended sentences, and to revoke the suspension in whole or in part upon violation of a condition of probation.”
State v. Williams, 983 P.2d 687 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “We hold, however, that the necessary authority is provided by RCW 3.66.068: “For a period not to exceed two years after imposition of sentence, the court has continuing jurisdiction and authority to suspend the execution of all or any part of its sentence upon stated terms,…”
State v. Haggard, 461 P.3d 1159 (Wash. 2020). “; see also RCW 3.66.068. 7 6 A court cannot defer sentences for alcohol- or drug-related offenses under RCW 46.”
State v. V.J., 132 P.3d 763 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “16 While the case was pending before the Supreme Court, the legislature added an express tolling provision to the municipal court statute, RCW 3.66.068. 17 No amendment was made to the JJA.”
State v. Jorgenson, 737 P.2d 1277 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “RCW 3.66.068 provides: For a period not to exceed two years after imposition of sentence, the court has continuing jurisdiction and authority to suspend the execution of all or any part of its sentence upon stated terms, including installment payment of fines.”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068(1) — 2 cases
State Of Washington v. Jennifer A. Richards, 537 P.3d 1118 (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
State of Washington v. Fernando Francisco (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068(1)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Granath, 415 P.3d 1179 (Wash. 2018). “Our conclusion does not prohibit a district court from issuing a five year no- contact order, which is the longest a district court can retain jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 3.”
State Of Washington v. Wendy Granath (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
State of Washington v. Fernando Francisco (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068(2)(a)(i) — 1 case
State v. Granath, 415 P.3d 1179 (Wash. 2018). “Our conclusion does not prohibit a district court from issuing a five year no- contact order, which is the longest a district court can retain jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 3.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068(3) — 3 cases
State v. D.D.-H., 385 P.3d 283 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
State Of Washington v. D.d-h. (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
City Of Seattle v. Derek Makasini, 480 P.3d 459 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068(5) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Fernando Francisco (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.068(l)(a) — 1 case
State v. Granath, 415 P.3d 1179 (Wash. 2018). “Our conclusion does not prohibit a district court from issuing a five year no- contact order, which is the longest a district court can retain jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 3.”
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.