Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9 · Chapter 9.94A
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.421 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The prosecutor and the attorney for the defendant, or the defendant when acting pro se, may engage in discussions with a view toward reaching an agreement that, upon the entering of a plea to a charged offense or to a lesser or related offense, the prosecutor will do any of the following:
(1) Move for dismissal of other charges or counts;
(2) Recommend a particular sentence within the sentence range applicable to the offense or offenses to which the offender pled guilty;
(3) Recommend a particular sentence outside of the sentence range;
(4) Agree to file a particular charge or count;
(5) Agree not to file other charges or counts; or
(6) Make any other promise to the defendant, except that in no instance may the prosecutor agree not to allege prior convictions.
In a case involving a crime against persons as defined in RCW 9.94A.411, the prosecutor shall make reasonable efforts to inform the victim of the violent offense of the nature of and reasons for the plea agreement, including all offenses the prosecutor has agreed not to file, and ascertain any objections or comments the victim has to the plea agreement.
The court shall not participate in any discussions under this section.
[ 1995 c 288 s 1; 1981 c 137 s 8. Formerly RCW 9.94A.080.]

Notes:

Effective date—1981 c 137: See RCW 9.94A.905.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: State v. Rice, 159 Wash. App. 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rice, 159 Wash. App. 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “Trial Court Involvement in Plea Bargaining ¶20 Next, Rice argues that RCW 9.94A.836 and .837 and former RCW 9.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Goodwin, 50 P.3d 618 (Wash. 2002). “For example, RCW 9.94A.421 (formerly RCW 9.94A.080, recodified, Laws of 2001, ch.”
State v. Ashue, 188 P.3d 522 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “RCW 9.94A.421 2 *500 specifically provides the prosecutor with the authority to amend charges against a defendant, to move for dismissal of the charges, and to recommend a particular sentence as part of a plea agreement.”
State v. Crawford, 147 P.3d 1288 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 9.94A.421 ("The prosecutor and the attorney for the defendant, or the defendant when acting pro se, may engage in discussions with a view toward reaching [a plea] agreement.”
State v. Crawford, 159 Wash. 2d 86 (Wash. 2006). “RCW 9.94A.421 (“The prosecutor and the attorney for the defendant, or the defendant when acting pro se, may engage in discussions with a view toward reaching [a plea] agreement.”
State v. Albarran, 383 P.3d 1037 (Wash. 2016). “507(3)(b) (for second degree rape and second degree rape of a child, the court shall impose a maximum and minimum term, with the maximum term equal to the statutory maximum); RCW 9A.”
In Re Goodwin, 50 P.3d 618 (Wash. 2002). “Thus, the State cannot by a plea agreement agree to less criminal history than exists, and cannot agree to a reduced offender score in this way. Similarly, the superior court rule on guilty pleas requires the defendant's written statement, set out in substantially the form…”
State v. Rice, 246 P.3d 234 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “TRIAL COURT INVOLVEMENT IN PLEA BARGAINING ¶ 20 Next, Rice argues that RCW 9.”
State v. Gronnert, 122 Wash. App. 214 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “080(3), recodified as RCW 9.94A.421(3) (Laws of 2001, ch. 10, § 6)).”
State of Washington v. Dahndre Kavaugn Westwood, 448 P.3d 771 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “080 (1981), recodified as RCW 9.94A.421; former RCW 9.94A.090 (1981), recodified as RCW 9.”
State v. Ehli, 62 P.3d 929 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 9.94A.421(5), (2). If the defendant pleads guilty pursuant to such an agreement, both the defendant and the prosecutor must file with the court their understanding of the defendant's criminal history before the plea is entered.”
State v. Ehli, 115 Wash. App. 556 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 9.94A.421(5), (2). If the defendant pleads guilty pursuant to such an agreement, both the defendant and the prosecutor must file with the court their understanding of the defendant’s criminal history before the plea is entered.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.421(3) — 2 cases
State v. Gronnert, 122 Wash. App. 214 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “080(3), recodified as RCW 9.94A.421(3) (Laws of 2001, ch. 10, § 6)).”
State v. Gronnert, 93 P.3d 200 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.421(5) — 3 cases
State v. Ehli, 62 P.3d 929 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 9.94A.421(5), (2). If the defendant pleads guilty pursuant to such an agreement, both the defendant and the prosecutor must file with the court their understanding of the defendant's criminal history before the plea is entered.”
State v. Ehli, 115 Wash. App. 556 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 9.94A.421(5), (2). If the defendant pleads guilty pursuant to such an agreement, both the defendant and the prosecutor must file with the court their understanding of the defendant’s criminal history before the plea is entered.”
State of Washington v. Veniamin Ben Glushchenko (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
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.