Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 66.44.180 (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 person guilty of a violation of this title for which no penalty has been specifically provided:

(a) For a first offense, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment for not more than two months, or both;

(b) For a second offense, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six months; and

(c) For a third or subsequent offense, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for up to three hundred sixty-four days.

(2) If the offender convicted of an offense referred to in this section is a corporation, it shall for a first offense be liable to a penalty of not more than five thousand dollars, and for a second or subsequent offense to a penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars, or to forfeiture of its corporate license, or both.

(3) Every district judge and municipal judge shall have concurrent jurisdiction with superior court judges of the state of Washington of all violations of the provisions of this title and may impose any punishment provided therefor.

[ 2011 c 96 s 47; 2003 c 53 s 300; 1987 c 202 s 225; 1981 1st ex.s. c 5 s 22; 1935 c 174 s 16; 1933 ex.s. c 62 s 93; RRS s 7306-93.]

Notes:

Findings—Intent—2011 c 96: See note following RCW 9A.20.021.

Intent—Effective date—2003 c 53: See notes following RCW 2.48.180.

Intent—1987 c 202: See note following RCW 2.04.190.

Effective date—1981 1st ex.s. c 5: See RCW 66.98.100.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases, 1963–2012 · leading case: Est. of Kelly v. Falin, 896 P.2d 1245 (Wash. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Est. of Kelly v. Falin, 896 P.2d 1245 (Wash. 1995). · cites it 4× “200 provides that "[n]o person shall sell any liquor to any person apparently under the influence of liquor" and imposes criminal penalties for noncompliance under RCW 66.44.180. Violation of a criminal statute is evidence of negligence only if the statute was intended to…”

Dodge City Saloon, Inc. v. Washington State Liquor Control Bd., 288 P.3d 343 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “RCW 66.44.180 (emphasis added). And it is well settled that [b]oard action, directed toward the suspension or cancellation of a retail liquor license is not a criminal proceeding.”

Schooley v. Pinch's Deli Mkt., Inc., 134 Wash. 2d 468 (Wash. 1998). “RCW 66.44.180. Although the Legislature was silent on the issue of civil liability, this court has recognized that the criminal provisions of the WABC Act may create a minimum standard of conduct for a reasonable person.”

Schooley v. Pinch's Deli Mkt., Inc., 951 P.2d 749 (Wash. 1998). “RCW 66.44.180. Although the Legislature was silent on the issue of civil liability, this court has recognized *752 that the criminal provisions of the WABC Act may create a minimum standard of conduct for a reasonable person.”

Hostetler v. Ward, 704 P.2d 1193 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985). “175 and RCW 66.44.180 prescribe criminal penalties for violations of RCW 66.”

Purchase v. Meyer, 737 P.2d 661 (Wash. 1987). “8 RCW 66.44.180. 9 See RCW 66.08.150; RCW 66.”

Callan v. O'NEIL, 578 P.2d 890 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). “RCW 66.44.180. Although the age of majority was reduced for most purposes to 18 in 1971, RCW 26.”

Est. of Templeton v. Daffern, 990 P.2d 968 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “[38] RCW 66.44.180 provides: Every person guilty of a violation of this title for which no penalty has been specifically provided shall be liable, on conviction, for a first offense to a penalty of not more than five hundred dollars, or to imprisonment for not more than two…”

Est. of Templeton v. Daffern, 98 Wash. App. 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “RCW 66.44.180 provides: Every person guilty of a violation of this title for which no penalty has been specifically provided shall be liable, on conviction, for a first offense to a penalty of not more than five hundred dollars, or to imprisonment for not more than two months,…”

State v. Sayward, 387 P.2d 746 (Wash. 1963). “There, the defendant was charged with the unlawful possession of liquor, with intent to sell it, the penalty for which is increased for subsequent offenses (RCW 66.44.180). Defendant Stump took the stand and, under cross-examination, admitted she had two prior convictions of…”

State v. Hieu Nhu Truong, 811 P.2d 938 (Wash. 1991). “RCW 66.44.180; Cowlitz County Ordinance 10.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 66.44.180(1) — 1 case

Dodge City Saloon, Inc. v. Washington State Liquor Control Bd., 288 P.3d 343 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “RCW 66.44.180 (emphasis added). And it is well settled that [b]oard action, directed toward the suspension or cancellation of a retail liquor license is not a criminal proceeding.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 66.44.180(2) — 1 case

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.