Wash. Rev. Code » Title 77 · Chapter 77.15
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 77.15.094 (2026)

Search without warrant—Seizure of evidence, property—Limitation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Fish and wildlife officers and ex officio fish and wildlife officers may make a reasonable search without warrant of a vessel, conveyances, vehicles, containers, packages, or other receptacles for fish, seaweed, shellfish, and wildlife which they have reason to believe contain evidence of a violation of law or rules adopted pursuant to this title and seize evidence as needed for law enforcement. This authority does not extend to quarters in a boat, building, or other property used exclusively as a private domicile, does not extend to transitory residences in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and does not allow search and seizure without a warrant if the thing or place is protected from search without warrant within the meaning of Article I, section 7 of the state Constitution. Seizure of property as evidence of a crime does not preclude seizure of the property for forfeiture as authorized by law.
[ 2001 c 253 s 25; 2000 c 107 s 214; 1998 c 190 s 115; 1987 c 506 s 20; 1980 c 78 s 21; 1955 c 36 s 77.12.090. Prior: 1947 c 275 s 19; Rem. Supp. 1947 s 5992-29. Formerly RCW 77.12.090.]

Notes:

Legislative findings and intent—1987 c 506: See note following RCW 77.04.020.
Effective date—Intent, construction—Savings—Severability—1980 c 78: See notes following RCW 77.04.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2007–2024 · leading case: Matthew Tarabochia v. Mickey Adkins, 766 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Matthew Tarabochia v. Mickey Adkins, 766 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2014). “Wash. Rev. Code § 77.15.094 (2001). The WDFW officers admit they lacked any “reason to believe” the salmon aboard the Tarabochi-as’ truck was “evidence of a violation.”
Schlegel v. Dep't of Licensing, 153 P.3d 244 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “RCW 77.15.094 authorizes wildlife officers to conduct a warrantless search and seizure of a “vessel, conveyances, vehicles, containers, packages, or other receptacles” upon reasonable belief that they contain evidence of fish and wildlife violations.”
State of Washington v. James Michael Miller, 545 P.3d 388 (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “For instance, RCW 77.15.094 allows officers to perform warrantless searches of “vehicles” based on reasonable suspicion that a vehicle contains evidence of a hunting and fishing violation.”
State of Washington, Dept. of Fish & Wildlife v. 1999 Ford F350 Pickup (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “070, and the accompanying seizure authorization statute, RCW 77.15.094. Since we conclude that the forfeiture notice was timely given, we do not address the cross appeal issue.”
Dep't of Fish & Wildlife v. One 1999 Ford F350 Diesel Pickup Truck, 331 P.3d 102 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “DFW then timely appealed to this court. The Coons cross appealed the attorney fee ruling.”
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.