Wash. Rev. Code » Title 37 · Chapter 37.12
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 37.12.021 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Whenever the governor of this state shall receive from the majority of any tribe or the tribal council or other governing body, duly recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, of any Indian tribe, community, band, or group in this state a resolution expressing its desire that its people and lands be subject to the criminal or civil jurisdiction of the state of Washington to the full extent authorized by federal law, he or she shall issue within sixty days a proclamation to the effect that such jurisdiction shall apply to all Indians and all Indian territory, reservations, country, and lands of the Indian body involved to the same extent that this state exercises civil and criminal jurisdiction or both elsewhere within the state: PROVIDED, That jurisdiction assumed pursuant to this section shall nevertheless be subject to the limitations set forth in RCW 37.12.060.
[ 2011 c 336 s 765; 1963 c 36 s 5.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases, 1969–2018 · leading case: State v. Hoffman, 804 P.2d 577 (Wash. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hoffman, 804 P.2d 577 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 6× “010, as enacted in 1963, binds the State to assume civil and criminal jurisdiction over Indians and Indian territory at the request of the affected tribe, as provided for in RCW 37.12.021 which states in pertinent part: Whenever the governor of this state shall receive from the…”
State v. Cooper, 928 P.2d 406 (Wash. 1996). · cites it 8× “, reservations, country, and lands within this state in accordance with [Public Law 280], but such assumption of jurisdiction shall not apply to Indians when on their tribal lands or allotted lands within an established Indian reservation and held in trust by the United States…”
State v. Cooper, 928 P.2d 406 (Wash. 1996). · cites it 8× “, reservations, country, and lands within this state in accordance with [Public Law 280], but such assumption of jurisdiction shall not apply to Indians when on their tribal lands or allotted lands within an established Indian reservation and held in trust by the United States…”
Tonasket v. State, 525 P.2d 744 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 6× “Pursuant to RCW 37.12.021, Governor Daniel J. Evans issued a proclamation assuming, on behalf of the State, the requested jurisdiction, which the State has since exercised.”
State v. Squally, 132 Wash. 2d 333 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 3× “240, § 1 (later codified as RCW 37.12.021). 3 According to this statute, the State’s assumption of jurisdiction was to be effective 60 days after the governor issued a proclamation that jurisdiction had been assumed.”
State v. Squally, 937 P.2d 1069 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 3× “240, § 1 (later codified as RCW 37.12.021). [3] According to this statute, the State's assumption of jurisdiction was to be effective 60 days after the *1072 governor issued a proclamation that jurisdiction had been assumed.”
In Re Adoption of Buehl, 555 P.2d 1334 (Wash. 1976). · cites it 2× “States given by the act of August 15, 1953 (Public Law 280, 83rd Congress, 1st Session), but such assumption of jurisdiction shall not apply to Indians when on their tribal lands or allotted lands within an established Indian reservation and held in trust by the United States or…”
Comenout v. Burdman, 525 P.2d 217 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 4× “States given by the act of August 15, 1953 (Public Law 280, 83rd Congress, 1st Session), but such assumption of jurisdiction shall not apply to Indians when on their tribal lands or allotted lands within an established Indian reservation and held in trust by the United States or…”
Outsource Servs. Mgmt., LLC v. Nooksack Bus. Corp., 333 P.3d 380 (Wash. 2014). “Washington will also assume full civil jurisdiction over tribes that consent to it, RCW 37.12.021, but the Nooksack Indian Tribe has not given that consent.”
Powell v. Farris, 620 P.2d 525 (Wash. 1980). · cites it 2× “010 has not asserted jurisdiction over the Puyallup Tribe as to a cause of action for dissolution and accounting, and since the tribe has not consented to additional jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 37.12.021, the superior court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of this…”
State v. Moses, 37 P.3d 1216 (Wash. 2002). “3 See RCW 37.12.021. In contrast, Colorado delayed assuming criminal jurisdiction within reservations until 1984.”
State v. Moses, 37 P.3d 1216 (Wash. 2002). “[3] See RCW 37.12.021. In contrast, Colorado *1220 delayed assuming criminal jurisdiction within reservations until 1984.”
Show all 37 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.