Wash. Rev. Code » Title 72 · Chapter 72.09
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345 (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) In addition to any other information required to be released under this chapter, the department is authorized, pursuant to RCW 4.24.550, to release relevant information that is necessary to protect the public concerning offenders convicted of sex offenses.
(2) In order for law enforcement agencies to have the information necessary to notify the public as authorized in RCW 4.24.550, the secretary shall establish and administer an end-of-sentence review committee for the purposes of assigning risk levels, reviewing available release plans, and making appropriate referrals for sex offenders.
(3) The committee shall assess, on a case-by-case basis, the public risk posed by:
(a) Offenders preparing for release from confinement for a sex offense or sexually violent offense committed on or after July 1, 1984;
(b) Sex offenders accepted from another state under a reciprocal agreement under the interstate corrections compact authorized in chapter 72.74 RCW;
(c) Juveniles preparing for release from confinement for a sex offense and releasing from the department of social and health services juvenile rehabilitation administration;
(d) Juveniles, following disposition, under the jurisdiction of a county juvenile court for a registerable sex offense; and
(e) Juveniles found to have committed a sex offense and accepted from another state under a reciprocal agreement under the interstate compact for juveniles authorized in chapter 13.24 RCW.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the committee shall have access to all relevant records and information in the possession of public agencies relating to the offenders under review, including police reports; prosecutors' statements of probable cause; presentence investigations and reports; complete judgments and sentences; current classification referrals; criminal history summaries; violation and disciplinary reports; all psychological evaluations and psychiatric hospital reports; sex offender treatment program reports; and juvenile records. Records and information obtained under this subsection shall not be disclosed outside the committee unless otherwise authorized by law.
(5) The committee shall review each sex offender under its authority before the offender's release from confinement or start of the offender's term of community custody in order to: (a) Classify the offender into a risk level for the purposes of public notification under RCW 4.24.550; (b) where available, review the offender's proposed release plan in accordance with the requirements of RCW 72.09.340; and (c) make appropriate referrals.
(6) The committee shall classify as risk level I those sex offenders whose risk assessments indicate they are at a low risk to sexually reoffend within the community at large. The committee shall classify as risk level II those offenders whose risk assessments indicate they are at a moderate risk to sexually reoffend within the community at large. The committee shall classify as risk level III those offenders whose risk assessments indicate they are at a high risk to sexually reoffend within the community at large.
(7) The committee shall issue to appropriate law enforcement agencies, for their use in making public notifications under RCW 4.24.550, narrative notices regarding the pending release of sex offenders from the department's facilities. The narrative notices shall, at a minimum, describe the identity and criminal history behavior of the offender and shall include the department's risk level classification for the offender. For sex offenders classified as either risk level II or III, the narrative notices shall also include the reasons underlying the classification.
[ 2015 c 261 s 14; 2011 c 338 s 5; 2008 c 231 s 49; 1997 c 364 s 4.]

Notes:

Intent—Application—Application of repealers—Effective date—2008 c 231: See notes following RCW 9.94A.701.
Severability—2008 c 231: See note following RCW 9.94A.500.
Severability—1997 c 364: See note following RCW 4.24.550.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: In Re Meyer, 16 P.3d 563 (Wash. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Meyer, 16 P.3d 563 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 8× “550 and RCW 72.09.345, [1] violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Meyer, 142 Wash. 2d 608 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 8× “550 and RCW 72.09.345, 1 violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
State v. Sanchez, 306 P.3d 935 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 5× “5204, which amended RCW 72.09.345 to add provisions pertaining to juveniles.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Dutcher, 60 P.3d 635 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “RCW 72.09.345 establishes the End of Sentence Review Committee and describes its various functions: (2) In order for public agencies to have the information necessary to notify the public as authorized in RCW 4.”
John Doe G v. Dep't of Corr., 410 P.3d 1156 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 2× “RCW 72.09.345(6). The John Does are a class—all of whom underwent SSOSA evaluations—comprised oftwo former level I sex offenders who have been relieved ofthe duty to register, and one current and compUant level I sex offender.”
In Re Dutcher, 60 P.3d 635 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “RCW 72.09.345 establishes the End of Sentence Review Committee and describes its various functions: (2) In order for public agencies to have the information necessary to notify the public as authorized in RCW 4.”
Osborn v. Mason Cnty., 157 Wash. 2d 18 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 72.09.345(5). Former RCW 9A.44.130 (2000) required counties to record the name, address, date and place of birth, criminal convictions, dates and places of conviction, aliases, Social Security number, photograph, and fingerprints of released sex offenders.”
Osborn v. Mason Cnty., 134 P.3d 197 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 72.09.345(5). [2] Former RCW 9A.44.130 (2000) required counties to record the name, address, date and place of birth, criminal convictions, dates and places of conviction, aliases, Social Security number, photograph, and fingerprints of released sex offenders.”
In re the Det. of Enright, 128 P.3d 1266 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “RCW 72.09.345(3), (4). Offenders classified as level I are considered at low risk to reoffend, while those classified as level II are at moderate risk and level III offenders are at high risk to reoffend.”
State v. Ramos, 202 P.3d 383 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “RCW 72.09.345(5) ("The committee shall classify as risk level I those sex offenders whose risk assessments indicate a low risk of reoffense within the community at large"; in other words, a low risk offender shall be classified as low risk).”
State v. Ramos, 149 Wash. App. 266 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “RCW 72.09.345(5) (“The committee shall classify as risk level I those sex offenders whose risk assessments indicate a low risk of reoffense within the community at large”; in other words, a low risk offender shall be classified as low risk).”
Kimberly Moehlmann v. Kelly M. Lambert, 363 P.3d 604 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “RCW 72.09.345(6). Each year, Favazza must register with the local sheriff as a sex offender.”
Show all 26 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(1) — 2 cases
Pers. Restraint Petition Of Manuel Parejo, 428 P.3d 130 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
Vernon Paul Vance, V Pierce Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(2) — 7 cases
In re the Pers. Restraint of Dutcher, 60 P.3d 635 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 72.09.345 establishes the End of Sentence Review Committee and describes its various functions: (2) In order for public agencies to have the information necessary to notify the public as authorized in RCW 4.”
In Re Dutcher, 60 P.3d 635 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 72.09.345 establishes the End of Sentence Review Committee and describes its various functions: (2) In order for public agencies to have the information necessary to notify the public as authorized in RCW 4.”
State v. Sanchez, 306 P.3d 935 (Wash. 2013). “5204, which amended RCW 72.09.345 to add provisions pertaining to juveniles.”
Pers. Restraint Petition Of Manuel Parejo, 428 P.3d 130 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Sanchez, 279 P.3d 999 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(3) — 7 cases
State v. Sanchez, 306 P.3d 935 (Wash. 2013). “5204, which amended RCW 72.09.345 to add provisions pertaining to juveniles.”
In Re Meyer, 16 P.3d 563 (Wash. 2001). “550 and RCW 72.09.345, [1] violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Meyer, 142 Wash. 2d 608 (Wash. 2001). “550 and RCW 72.09.345, 1 violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
In re the Det. of Enright, 128 P.3d 1266 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “RCW 72.09.345(3), (4). Offenders classified as level I are considered at low risk to reoffend, while those classified as level II are at moderate risk and level III offenders are at high risk to reoffend.”
State v. Brosius, 225 P.3d 1049 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(3)(a) — 1 case
Pers. Restraint Petition Of James L. Walters (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(4) — 4 cases
In Re Meyer, 16 P.3d 563 (Wash. 2001). “550 and RCW 72.09.345, [1] violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Meyer, 142 Wash. 2d 608 (Wash. 2001). “550 and RCW 72.09.345, 1 violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
Pers. Restraint Petition Of James L. Walters (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Pers. Restraint Petition Of James L. Walters (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(5) — 13 cases
Osborn v. Mason Cnty., 157 Wash. 2d 18 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 72.09.345(5). Former RCW 9A.44.130 (2000) required counties to record the name, address, date and place of birth, criminal convictions, dates and places of conviction, aliases, Social Security number, photograph, and fingerprints of released sex offenders.”
Osborn v. Mason Cnty., 134 P.3d 197 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 72.09.345(5). [2] Former RCW 9A.44.130 (2000) required counties to record the name, address, date and place of birth, criminal convictions, dates and places of conviction, aliases, Social Security number, photograph, and fingerprints of released sex offenders.”
In Re Meyer, 16 P.3d 563 (Wash. 2001). “550 and RCW 72.09.345, [1] violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Meyer, 142 Wash. 2d 608 (Wash. 2001). “550 and RCW 72.09.345, 1 violates the due process rights of those sex offenders when the consequences of such risk classification provide for the release of information about those offenders to the public.”
State v. Ramos, 202 P.3d 383 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “RCW 72.09.345(5) ("The committee shall classify as risk level I those sex offenders whose risk assessments indicate a low risk of reoffense within the community at large"; in other words, a low risk offender shall be classified as low risk).”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(6) — 7 cases
John Doe G v. Dep't of Corr., 410 P.3d 1156 (Wash. 2018). “RCW 72.09.345(6). The John Does are a class—all of whom underwent SSOSA evaluations—comprised oftwo former level I sex offenders who have been relieved ofthe duty to register, and one current and compUant level I sex offender.”
Kimberly Moehlmann v. Kelly M. Lambert, 363 P.3d 604 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “RCW 72.09.345(6). Each year, Favazza must register with the local sheriff as a sex offender.”
In re the Det. of Enright, 128 P.3d 1266 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “RCW 72.09.345(3), (4). Offenders classified as level I are considered at low risk to reoffend, while those classified as level II are at moderate risk and level III offenders are at high risk to reoffend.”
Pers. Restraint Petition Of James L. Walters (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Pers. Restraint Petition Of James L. Walters (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 72.09.345(7) — 1 case
State v. Sanchez (Wash. 2013).
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.