Wash. Rev. Code » Title 43 · Chapter 43.43
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 43.43.690 (2026)

Crime laboratory analysis fee—Court imposition—Collection

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) When an adult offender has been adjudged guilty of violating any criminal statute of this state and a crime laboratory analysis was performed by a state crime laboratory, in addition to any other disposition, penalty, or fine imposed, the court shall levy a crime laboratory analysis fee of one hundred dollars for each offense for which the person was convicted. Upon a verified petition by the person assessed the fee, the court may suspend payment of all or part of the fee if it finds that the person does not have the ability to pay the fee.
(2) All crime laboratory analysis fees assessed under this section shall be collected by the clerk of the court and forwarded to the state general fund, to be used only for crime laboratories. The clerk may retain five dollars to defray the costs of collecting the fees.
[ 2015 c 265 s 30; 1992 c 129 s 2.]

Notes:

Finding—Intent—2015 c 265: See note following RCW 13.50.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1996–2025 · leading case: State Of Washington v. Joshua J. Clark, 381 P.3d 198 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Of Washington v. Joshua J. Clark, 381 P.3d 198 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “690(1) provides: When a person has been adjudged guilty of violating any criminal statute of this state and a crime laboratory analysis was performed by a state crime laboratory, in addition to any other disposition, penalty, or fine imposed, the court shall levy a crime…”
State Of Washington v. Michael Christopher Shelton, 378 P.3d 230 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “030); [X] Recoupment is waived; (e) [ ] $_, $100 State Crime Laboratory Fee (RCW 43.43.690); [X] Laboratory fee waived; (f) [ ] $_, Incarceration costs (RCW 9.”
State Of Washington v. Jesse Johns, 477 P.3d 522 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “RCW 43.43.690(1), No. 53428-2-II FACTS Johns pleaded guilty to two counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance other than marijuana.”
State v. Moon, 100 P.3d 357 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 8× “Moon asks us to interpret RCW 43.43.690 as meaning he must be “adjudged guilty” of the particular crime for the statute to apply.”
State of Washington v. Mariano Diaz-Farias, 362 P.3d 322 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “The fee was assessed under RCW 43.43.690, which provides in part: When an adult offender has been adjudged guilty of violating any criminal statute of this state and a crime laboratory analysis was performed by a state crime laboratory, in addition to any other disposition,…”
State v. Hamedian, 354 P.3d 937 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “035, or the crime laboratory analysis fee set forth in RCW 43.43.690 may petition the court for modification or relief from those legal financial obligations and interest accrued on those obligations for good cause shown, including inability to pay.”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Weaver, 929 P.2d 445 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “120(3), RCW 43.43.690(2), and RCW 46.61.5054(l)(c), various penalties may be assessed against a juvenile for an offense which, if committed by an adult, would constitute a crime or violation.”
State Of Washington v. Alvaro Balderas-lopez (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “6 See Former RCW 43.43.690(1) (1992) amended by Laws of 2015, ch.”
State Of Washington, V Troy Darrin Meyers (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “”1° RCW 43.43.690(1) addresses imposition of the laboratory fee.”
State Of Washington v. Richard S. Mclaughlin (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “RCW 43.43.690 governs the mandatory imposition of the crime laboratory fee.”
State of Washington v. Roberta Bresnahan Jones (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “$ 200 Crime lab fee RCW 43.43.690 3 No. 38944-8-III State v. Jones The sentencing court imposed a total of $6,750 in LFOs.”
State Of Washington v. Warren Carlos Mabry (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Former RCW 43.43.690(1) (1992) (emphasis added).”
Show all 31 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 43.43.690(1) — 21 cases
State Of Washington v. Joshua J. Clark, 381 P.3d 198 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “690(1) provides: When a person has been adjudged guilty of violating any criminal statute of this state and a crime laboratory analysis was performed by a state crime laboratory, in addition to any other disposition, penalty, or fine imposed, the court shall levy a crime…”
State Of Washington v. Jesse Johns, 477 P.3d 522 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “RCW 43.43.690(1), No. 53428-2-II FACTS Johns pleaded guilty to two counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance other than marijuana.”
State of Washington v. Mariano Diaz-Farias, 362 P.3d 322 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “The fee was assessed under RCW 43.43.690, which provides in part: When an adult offender has been adjudged guilty of violating any criminal statute of this state and a crime laboratory analysis was performed by a state crime laboratory, in addition to any other disposition,…”
State v. Moon, 100 P.3d 357 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Moon asks us to interpret RCW 43.43.690 as meaning he must be “adjudged guilty” of the particular crime for the statute to apply.”
State Of Washington v. Alvaro Balderas-lopez (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “6 See Former RCW 43.43.690(1) (1992) amended by Laws of 2015, ch.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 43.43.690(2) — 1 case
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Weaver, 929 P.2d 445 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “120(3), RCW 43.43.690(2), and RCW 46.61.5054(l)(c), various penalties may be assessed against a juvenile for an offense which, if committed by an adult, would constitute a crime or violation.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 43.43.690(3) — 1 case
State Of Washington v. Joshua J. Clark, 381 P.3d 198 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “690(1) provides: When a person has been adjudged guilty of violating any criminal statute of this state and a crime laboratory analysis was performed by a state crime laboratory, in addition to any other disposition, penalty, or fine imposed, the court shall levy a crime…”
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.