Wash. Rev. Code » Title 70 · Chapter 70.48
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 70.48.390 (2026)

Fee payable by person being booked

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A governing unit may require that each person who is booked at a city, county, or regional jail pay a fee based on the jail's actual booking costs or one hundred dollars, whichever is less, to the sheriff's department of the county or police chief of the city in which the jail is located. The fee is payable immediately from any money then possessed by the person being booked, or any money deposited with the sheriff's department or city jail administration on the person's behalf. If the person has no funds at the time of booking or during the period of incarceration, the sheriff or police chief may notify the court in the county or city where the charges related to the booking are pending, and may request the assessment of the fee. Unless the person is held on other criminal matters, if the person is not charged, is acquitted, or if all charges are dismissed, the sheriff or police chief shall return the fee to the person at the last known address listed in the booking records.
[ 2003 c 99 s 1; 1999 c 325 s 3.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2006–2019 · leading case: Garrison v. Asotin Cnty., 251 F.R.D. 566 (E.D. Wash. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Garrison v. Asotin Cnty., 251 F.R.D. 566 (E.D. Wash. 2008). · cites it 11× “In May 1999, the Washington legislature passed RCW § 70.48.390, autho *568 rizing city, county, and regional jails to take a $10.”
Huss v. Spokane Cnty., 464 F. Supp. 2d 1056 (E.D. Wash. 2006). · cites it 14× “Plaintiff alleges the official booking fee policy of the Spokane County Jail (the Jail) and RCW 70.48.390 are facially unconstitutional by depriving persons of their property without due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
State of Washington v. Seth Eden Ash (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “160(2); RCW 70.48.390. However, the second factor-the administrative burden and expense of bringing Ash to court for a new sentencing hearing-weighs in favor of review.”
State of Washington v. Caleb Joel Stanley (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “The booking fee is authorized by RCW 70.48.390. This statute was unaltered by the 2018 LFO amendments.”
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.