Wash. Rev. Code » Title 4 · Chapter 4.44
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.44.130 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Either party may challenge the jurors. The challenge shall be to individual jurors, and be peremptory or for cause. Each party shall be entitled to three peremptory challenges. When there is more than one party on either side, the parties need not join in a challenge for cause; but, they shall join in a peremptory challenge before it can be made. If the court finds that there is a conflict of interests between parties on the same side, the court may allow each conflicting party up to three peremptory challenges.
[ 1969 ex.s. c 37 s 1; Code 1881 s 207; 1877 p 43 s 211; 1854 p 165 s 186; RRS s 324.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: State v. Sassen Van Elsloo, 425 P.3d 807 (Wash. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Sassen Van Elsloo, 425 P.3d 807 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 6× “If a trial judge erroneously dismisses a potential juror, the defendant is entitled to a new trial if he or she establishes that the erroneous dismissal was prejudicial.”
State v. Kwan Fai Mak, 718 P.2d 407 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 2× “[24] RCW 4.44.130. [25] RCW 4.44.150. [26] RCW 4.”
State v. Lawler, 374 P.3d 278 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 4.44.130. Lawler argues that juror 23 demonstrated actual bias.”
State Of Washington v. Mario R Guevara-diaz, 456 P.3d 869 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “in reference to the action, or to either party, which satisfies the court that the challenged person cannot try the issue impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party challenging.”
State Of Washington, V. Alejandro Pena Salvador, 487 P.3d 923 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “RCW 4.44.130; RCW 4.44.170(2). Actual bias is “the existence of a state of mind on the part of the juror in reference to the action, or to either party, which satisfies the court that the challenged person cannot try the issue impartially and without prejudice to the substantial…”
Portch v. Sommerville, 113 Wash. App. 807 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “210, which states: The jurors having been examined as to their qualifications, first by the plaintiff and then by the defendant, and passed for cause, the peremptory challenges shall be conducted as follows, to wit: The plaintiff may challenge one, and then the defendant may…”
Ottis v. Stevenson-Carson Sch. Dist. No. 303, 812 P.2d 133 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “RCW 4.44.130; see also CR 47(e). Challenges for cause may be general or particular.”
Brady v. Fibreboard Corp., 857 P.2d 1094 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). “RCW 4.44.130. When for cause, it can be general or *283 particular.”
State Of Washington v. David Levice Phillips, 431 P.3d 1056 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “RCW 4.44.130. Actual bias is a ground for challenging a juror for cause.”
Martini v. State, 121 Wash. App. 150 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “” 39 If it has two or *165 more reasonable meanings, it is “ambiguous,” 40 and we must implement whichever meaning the legislature intended 41 Under RCW 4.44.130, a party’s challenge to a prospective juror can be for cause or peremptory.”
Portch v. Sommerville, 55 P.3d 661 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “210, which states: The jurors having been examined as to their qualifications, first by the plaintiff and then by the defendant, and passed for cause, the peremptory challenges shall be conducted as follows, to wit: The plaintiff may challenge one, and then the defendant may…”
Martini Ex Rel. Dussault v. State, 89 P.3d 250 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “[41] Under RCW 4.44.130, a party's challenge to a prospective juror can be for cause or peremptory.”
Show all 35 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.