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

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.92.900 (2026)

RCW * 9.92.050 through 9.92.090 inapplicable to felonies committed on or after July 1, 1984

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The following sections of law do not apply to any felony offense committed on or after July 1, 1984: RCW * 9.92.050, 9.92.060, 9.92.062, 9.92.064, 9.92.066, 9.92.070, 9.92.080, and 9.92.090.
[ 1984 c 209 s 2; 1981 c 137 s 31.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: RCW 9.92.050 was repealed by 1992 c 7 s 64.
Effective dates—1984 c 209: See note following RCW 9.94A.030.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1984–2012 · leading case: State v. Thorne, 921 P.2d 514 (Wash. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Thorne, 921 P.2d 514 (Wash. 1996). “RCW 9.92.900. State v. Rivers, 129 Wn.2d 697 .”
State v. LeFever, 690 P.2d 574 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 2× “…sentencing act, the habitual criminal statute, RCW 9.92.090, applies only to crimes committed before July 1, 1984. RCW 9.92.900.”
People v. Martinez, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3506 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999). “( Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.92.900 .). 7 Louisiana Revised Statutes Annotated section 15:529.”
State v. Swanson, 116 Wash. App. 67 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “This statute, which applies only to felonies committed before July 1, 1984 (see RCW 9.92.900), allows a person to apply for restoration of civil rights upon termination of his “suspended” sentence.”
State v. Van Buren, 98 P.3d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “[8] See RCW 9.92.900. [9] See former RCW 9.94A.589(1)(a) (2000).”
State v. Van Buren, 123 Wash. App. 634 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “See RCW 9.92.900. See former RCW 9.94A.589(l)(a) (2000).”
State v. Carmen, 77 P.3d 368 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “Although the habitual offender statute is not applicable to felonies committed after July 1, 1984, see RCW 9.92.900, the case law construing the statute is also helpful to the current analysis.”
State v. Carmen, 118 Wash. App. 655 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “Although the habitual offender statute is not applicable to felonies committed after July 1, 1984, see RCW 9.92.900, the case law construing the statute is also helpful to the current analysis.”
State v. Witherspoon, 286 P.3d 996 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “To support her departure from current precedent, Judge Quinn-Brintnall cites two United States Supreme Court cases.”
State v. Thomas, 155 P.3d 998 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “RCW 9.92.900. [2] RCW 9.95.210 relates to the granting of probation for non-SRA sentences and subsection (2), in relevant part, provides the court imposing probation power to order the defendant "to make restitution to any person or persons who may have suffered loss or damage…”
State v. Thomas, 138 Wash. App. 78 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “RCW 9.92.900. RCW 9.95.210 relates to the granting of probation for non-SRA (Sentencing Reform Act, chapter 9.”
State v. De Rosia, 100 P.3d 331 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “e of which fraud or intent to defraud is an element, or of petit larceny, or of any felony, who shall previously have been twice convicted, whether in this state or elsewhere, of any crime which under the laws of this state would amount to a felony, or who shall previously have…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.