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

Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.100 (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) Every district judge having authority to hear a particular case may issue criminal process in and to any place in the state.
(2) Every district judge having authority to hear a particular case may issue civil process, including writs of execution, attachment, garnishment, and replevin, in and to any place as permitted by statute or rule. This statute does not authorize service of process pursuant to RCW 4.28.180 in actions filed pursuant to chapter 12.40 RCW, except in actions brought against an owner under chapter 59.18 RCW, or in civil infraction matters.
[ 2011 c 132 s 3; 1998 c 73 s 1; 1987 c 442 s 1101; 1984 c 258 s 701; 1961 c 299 s 121.]

Notes:

Court Improvement Act of 1984—Effective dates—Severability—Short title—1984 c 258: See notes following RCW 3.30.010.
Issuance of process
infractions generally: RCW 7.80.020.
natural resource infractions: RCW 7.84.120.
traffic infractions: RCW 46.63.130.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1980–2015 · leading case: City of Seattle v. Guay, 150 Wash. 2d 288 (Wash. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Seattle v. Guay, 150 Wash. 2d 288 (Wash. 2003). · cites it 2× “The mechanism of transport, which so concerns the majority, flows from the court’s jurisdiction found in RCW 3.66.100, RCW 35.20.110, and the rule-making authority of RCW 2.”
City of Seattle v. Guay, 76 P.3d 231 (Wash. 2003). · cites it 2× “The mechanism of transport, which so concerns the majority, flows from the court's jurisdiction found in RCW 3.66.100, RCW 35.20.110, and the rule making authority of RCW 2.”
State v. Davidson, 613 P.2d 564 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 4× “The trial court suppressed the evidence on the ground that, under RCW 3.66.100, 1 a district court judge may not issue search warrants for premises located outside the judge's county unless the district court has the authority to hear the resulting case.”
State Of Washington v. David E. Bliss, 365 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “And regarding a district court’s territorial jurisdiction, RCW 3.66.100(1) explains that “[e]very district judge having authority to hear a particular case may issue criminal process in and to any place in the state.”
State v. Uhthoff, 724 P.2d 1103 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 5× “509, the judge of Bellevue District Court, located in King County, had jurisdiction to issue a warrant for the search and seizure of controlled substances at Uhthoff's residence in Seattle, King County, Washington, even without the prosecutor's approval.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.100(1) — 3 cases
City of Seattle v. Guay, 150 Wash. 2d 288 (Wash. 2003). “The mechanism of transport, which so concerns the majority, flows from the court’s jurisdiction found in RCW 3.66.100, RCW 35.20.110, and the rule-making authority of RCW 2.”
City of Seattle v. Guay, 76 P.3d 231 (Wash. 2003). “The mechanism of transport, which so concerns the majority, flows from the court's jurisdiction found in RCW 3.66.100, RCW 35.20.110, and the rule making authority of RCW 2.”
State Of Washington v. David E. Bliss, 365 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “And regarding a district court’s territorial jurisdiction, RCW 3.66.100(1) explains that “[e]very district judge having authority to hear a particular case may issue criminal process in and to any place in the state.”
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.