Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9 · Chapter 9.92
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.080 (2026)

Sentence on two or more convictions or counts

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Whenever a person while under sentence of felony shall commit another felony and be sentenced to another term of imprisonment, such latter term shall not begin until the expiration of all prior terms: PROVIDED, That any person granted probation pursuant to the provisions of RCW 9.95.210 and/or 9.92.060 shall not be considered to be under sentence of a felony for the purposes of this subsection.
(2) Whenever a person is convicted of two or more offenses which arise from a single act or omission, the sentences imposed therefor shall run concurrently, unless the court, in pronouncing sentence, expressly orders the service of said sentences to be consecutive.
(3) In all other cases, whenever a person is convicted of two or more offenses arising from separate and distinct acts or omissions, and not otherwise governed by the provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section, the sentences imposed therefor shall run consecutively, unless the court, in pronouncing the second or other subsequent sentences, expressly orders concurrent service thereof.
(4) The sentencing court may require the secretary of corrections, or his or her designee, to provide information to the court concerning the existence of all prior judgments against the defendant, the terms of imprisonment imposed, and the status thereof.
[ 2011 c 336 s 331; 1981 c 136 s 35; 1971 ex.s. c 295 s 1; 1925 ex.s. c 109 s 2; 1909 c 249 s 33; RRS s 2285.]

Notes:

Applicability—1984 c 209: See RCW 9.92.900.
Effective date—1981 c 136: See RCW 72.09.900.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 68 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: Jansen v. Morris, 551 P.2d 743 (Wash. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jansen v. Morris, 551 P.2d 743 (Wash. 1976). · cites it 24× “[3] At the time petitioner was convicted and sentenced, RCW 9.92.080 [4] provided: Whenever a person shall be convicted of two or more offenses before sentence has been pronounced for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent…”
State v. Johnson, 639 P.2d 1332 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 6× “That the legislature intends as the public policy of this state that defendants can be charged and convicted for different crimes arising from a single act is clear from RCW 9.92.080(2) which calls for concurrent sentences unless the court orders otherwise: Whenever a person is…”
State v. Chhom, 173 P.3d 234 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 2× “See RCW 9.92.080. [7] Under the State's interpretation of former CrRLJ 3.”
State v. Chhom, 162 Wash. 2d 451 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 2× “See RCW 9.92.080. 7 Under the State’s interpretation of former CrRLJ 3.”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Chapman, 713 P.2d 106 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 6× “In passing we note that RCW 9.92.080 has been superseded by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 and does not control felonies occurring after June 30, 1984, RCW 9.”
Mortell v. State, 118 Wash. App. 846 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “) RCW 9.92.080(3) provides that “whenever a person is convicted of two or more offenses arising from separate and distinct acts or omissions, .”
State v. Manussier, 921 P.2d 473 (Wash. 1996). “[119] RCW 9.92.080. [120] See State v. Kelly, 52 Wash.”
State v. Manussier, 129 Wash. 2d 652 (Wash. 1996). “RCW 9.92.080. See State v. Kelly, 52 Wn.2d 676, 678 , 328 P.”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Paschke, 790 P.2d 1250 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 8× “) 5 RCW 9.92.080 provides in relevant part: "(1) Whenever a person while under sentence of felony shall commit another felony and be sentenced to another term of imprisonment, such latter term shall not begin until the expiration of all prior terms .”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Irwin, 751 P.2d 289 (Wash. 1988). · cites it 3× “Insofar as the concurrent/consecutive sentence issue is concerned, the pre-SRA statutes include RCW 9.92.080 which empowers the trial court to make a determination as to whether certain sentences should run concurrently or consecutively.”
State v. Brown, 630 P.2d 1378 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 3× “*778 Brown's contention below and on appeal concerns the effect of RCW 9.92.080(1), which provides: Whenever a person while under sentence of felony shall commit another felony and be sentenced to another term of imprisonment, such latter term shall not begin until the…”
State v. Cunningham, 598 P.2d 756 (Wash. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “RCW 9.92.080 empowers the trial court to impose consecutive sentences.”
Show all 68 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.080(1) — 18 cases
State v. Brown, 630 P.2d 1378 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). “*778 Brown's contention below and on appeal concerns the effect of RCW 9.92.080(1), which provides: Whenever a person while under sentence of felony shall commit another felony and be sentenced to another term of imprisonment, such latter term shall not begin until the…”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Williams, 583 P.2d 1262 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978).
Brooks v. Rhay, 602 P.2d 356 (Wash. 1979).
State v. Campbell, 770 P.2d 620 (Wash. 1989).
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Akridge, 581 P.2d 1050 (Wash. 1978).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.080(2) — 14 cases
State v. Johnson, 639 P.2d 1332 (Wash. 1982). “That the legislature intends as the public policy of this state that defendants can be charged and convicted for different crimes arising from a single act is clear from RCW 9.92.080(2) which calls for concurrent sentences unless the court orders otherwise: Whenever a person is…”
State v. Birgen, 651 P.2d 240 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982).
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Shriner, 627 P.2d 99 (Wash. 1981).
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Paschke, 790 P.2d 1250 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990). “) 5 RCW 9.92.080 provides in relevant part: "(1) Whenever a person while under sentence of felony shall commit another felony and be sentenced to another term of imprisonment, such latter term shall not begin until the expiration of all prior terms .”
State v. Tu Nam Song, 748 P.2d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.080(3) — 17 cases
Mortell v. State, 118 Wash. App. 846 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “) RCW 9.92.080(3) provides that “whenever a person is convicted of two or more offenses arising from separate and distinct acts or omissions, .”
State v. Chhom, 173 P.3d 234 (Wash. 2007). “See RCW 9.92.080. [7] Under the State's interpretation of former CrRLJ 3.”
State v. Chhom, 162 Wash. 2d 451 (Wash. 2007). “See RCW 9.92.080. 7 Under the State’s interpretation of former CrRLJ 3.”
State v. Van Buren, 98 P.3d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
State v. Van Buren, 123 Wash. App. 634 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.080(4) — 1 case
State v. Murdock, 588 P.2d 1143 (Wash. 1979).
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.