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

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701 (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) If an offender is sentenced to the custody of the department for one of the following crimes, the court shall, in addition to the other terms of the sentence, sentence the offender to community custody for three years:
(a) A sex offense not sentenced under RCW 9.94A.507; or
(b) A serious violent offense.
(2) A court shall, in addition to the other terms of the sentence, sentence an offender to community custody for eighteen months when the court sentences the person to the custody of the department for a violent offense that is not considered a serious violent offense.
(3) A court shall, in addition to the other terms of the sentence, sentence an offender to community custody for one year when the court sentences the person to the custody of the department for:
(a) Any crime against persons under RCW 9.94A.411(2);
(b) An offense involving the unlawful possession of a firearm under RCW 9.41.040, where the offender is a criminal street gang member or associate;
(c) A felony offense under chapter 69.50 or 69.52 RCW, committed on or after July 1, 2000; or
(d) A felony violation of RCW 9A.44.132(1) (failure to register) that is the offender's first violation for a felony failure to register.
(4) If an offender is sentenced under the drug offender sentencing alternative, the court shall impose community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.660.
(5) If an offender is sentenced under the special sex offender sentencing alternative, the court shall impose community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.670.
(6) If an offender is sentenced to a work ethic camp, the court shall impose community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.690.
(7) If an offender is sentenced under the parenting sentencing alternative, the court shall impose a term of community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.655.
(8) If the offender is sentenced under the mental health sentencing alternative, the court shall impose a term of community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.695.
(9) If a sex offender is sentenced as a nonpersistent offender pursuant to RCW 9.94A.507, the court shall impose community custody as provided in that section.
(10) The term of community custody specified by this section shall be reduced by the court whenever an offender's standard range term of confinement in combination with the term of community custody exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime as provided in RCW 9A.20.021.
[ 2021 c 242 s 6. Prior: 2010 c 267 s 11; 2010 c 224 s 5; 2009 c 375 s 5; 2009 c 28 s 10; 2008 c 231 s 7.]

Notes:

Applicability—2021 c 242: See note following RCW 9.94A.695.
Application—2010 c 267: See note following RCW 9A.44.128.
Application—2009 c 375: See note following RCW 9.94A.501.
Effective date—2009 c 28: See note following RCW 2.24.040.
Intent—2008 c 231: "The existing sentencing reform act contains numerous provisions for supervision of different types of offenders. This duplication has caused great confusion for judges, lawyers, offenders, and the department of corrections, and often results in inaccurate sentences. The clarifications in this act are intended to support continued discussions by the sentencing guidelines commission with the courts and the criminal justice community to identify and propose policy changes that will further simplify and improve the sentencing reform act relating to the supervision of offenders. The sentencing guidelines commission shall submit policy change proposals to the legislature on or before December 1, 2008.
Sections 7 through 58 of this act are intended to simplify the supervision provisions of the sentencing reform act and increase the uniformity of its application. These sections are not intended to either increase or decrease the authority of sentencing courts or the department relating to supervision, except for those provisions instructing the court to apply the provisions of the current community custody law to offenders sentenced after July 1, 2009, but who committed their crime prior to August 1, 2009, to the extent that such application is constitutionally permissible.
This will effect a change for offenders who committed their crimes prior to the offender accountability act, chapter 196, Laws of 1999. These offenders will be ordered to a term of community custody rather than community placement or community supervision. To the extent constitutionally permissible, the terms of the offender's supervision will be as provided in current law. With the exception of this change, the legislature does not intend to make, and no provision of sections 7 through 58 of this act may be construed as making, a substantive change to the supervision provisions of the sentencing reform act." [ 2009 c 375 s 10; 2008 c 231 s 6.]
Application—2008 c 231 ss 6-58: "(1) Sections 6 through 58 of this act apply to all sentences imposed or reimposed on or after August 1, 2009, for any crime committed on or after August 1, 2009.
(2) Sections 6 through 58 of this act also apply to all sentences imposed or reimposed on or after August 1, 2009, for crimes committed prior to August 1, 2009, to the extent that such application is constitutionally permissible.
(3) To the extent that application of sections 6 through 58 of this act is not constitutionally permissible with respect to any offender, the sentence for such offender shall be governed by the law as it existed before August 1, 2009, or on such prior date as may be constitutionally required, notwithstanding any amendment or repeal of provisions of such law.
(4) If application of sections 6 through 58 of this act is not constitutionally permissible with respect to any offender, the judgment and sentence shall specify the particular sentencing provisions that will not apply to such offender. Whenever practical, the judgment and sentence shall use the terminology set out in this act.
(5) The sentencing guidelines commission shall prepare a summary of the circumstances under which application of sections 6 through 58 of this act is not constitutionally permissible. The summary should include recommendations of conditions that could be included in judgments and sentences in order to prevent unconstitutional application of the act. This summary shall be incorporated into the Adult Sentencing Guidelines Manual.
(6) Sections 6 through 58 of this act shall not affect the enforcement of any sentence that was imposed prior to August 1, 2009, unless the offender is resentenced after that date." [ 2008 c 231 s 55.]
Application of repealers—2008 c 231 s 57: "The repealers in section 57 of this act shall not affect the validity of any sentence that was imposed prior to August 1, 2009, or the authority of the department of corrections to supervise any offender pursuant to such sentence." [ 2008 c 231 s 58.]
Effective date—2008 c 231 ss 6-60: "Sections 6 through 60 of this act take effect August 1, 2009." [ 2008 c 231 s 61.]
Severability—2008 c 231: See note following RCW 9.94A.500.
PDF

RCW 9.94A.701

Community custody—Offenders sentenced to the custody of the department. (Effective January 1, 2026.)

(1) If an offender is sentenced to the custody of the department for one of the following crimes, the court shall, in addition to the other terms of the sentence, sentence the offender to community custody for three years:
(a) A sex offense not sentenced under RCW 9.94A.507; or
(b) A serious violent offense.
(2) A court shall, in addition to the other terms of the sentence, sentence an offender to community custody for 18 months when the court sentences the person to the custody of the department for a violent offense that is not considered a serious violent offense.
(3) A court shall, in addition to the other terms of the sentence, sentence an offender to community custody for one year when the court sentences the person to the custody of the department for:
(a) Any crime against persons under RCW 9.94A.411(2);
(b) An offense involving the unlawful possession of a firearm under RCW 9.41.040, where the offender is a criminal street gang member or associate;
(c) A felony offense under chapter 69.50 or 69.52 RCW, committed on or after July 1, 2000; or
(d) A felony violation of RCW 9A.44.132(1) (failure to register) that is the offender's first violation for a felony failure to register.
(4) If an offender is sentenced under the drug offender sentencing alternative, the court shall impose community custody as provided in:
(a) RCW 9.94A.660 and 9.94A.662 for a prison-based drug offender sentencing alternative;
(b) RCW 9.94A.660 and 9.94A.664 for a residential-based drug offender sentencing alternative;
(c) RCW 9.94A.662 and 9.94A.661(6) for a prison-based drug offender sentencing alternative for driving under the influence; and
(d) RCW 9.94A.661 (5) and (6) for a residential-based drug offender sentencing alternative for driving under the influence.
(5) If an offender is sentenced under the special sex offender sentencing alternative, the court shall impose community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.670.
(6) If an offender is sentenced to a work ethic camp, the court shall impose community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.690.
(7) If an offender is sentenced under the parenting sentencing alternative, the court shall impose a term of community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.655.
(8) If the offender is sentenced under the mental health sentencing alternative, the court shall impose a term of community custody as provided in RCW 9.94A.695.
(9) If a sex offender is sentenced as a nonpersistent offender pursuant to RCW 9.94A.507, the court shall impose community custody as provided in that section.
(10) The term of community custody specified by this section shall be reduced by the court whenever an offender's standard sentence range term of confinement in combination with the term of community custody exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime as provided in RCW 9A.20.021.
[ 2024 c 306 s 10; 2021 c 242 s 6. Prior: 2010 c 267 s 11; 2010 c 224 s 5; 2009 c 375 s 5; 2009 c 28 s 10; 2008 c 231 s 7.]

Notes:

Effective date—2024 c 306: See note following RCW 9.94A.661.
Applicability—2021 c 242: See note following RCW 9.94A.695.
Application—2010 c 267: See note following RCW 9A.44.128.
Application—2009 c 375: See note following RCW 9.94A.501.
Effective date—2009 c 28: See note following RCW 2.24.040.
Intent—2008 c 231: "The existing sentencing reform act contains numerous provisions for supervision of different types of offenders. This duplication has caused great confusion for judges, lawyers, offenders, and the department of corrections, and often results in inaccurate sentences. The clarifications in this act are intended to support continued discussions by the sentencing guidelines commission with the courts and the criminal justice community to identify and propose policy changes that will further simplify and improve the sentencing reform act relating to the supervision of offenders. The sentencing guidelines commission shall submit policy change proposals to the legislature on or before December 1, 2008.
Sections 7 through 58 of this act are intended to simplify the supervision provisions of the sentencing reform act and increase the uniformity of its application. These sections are not intended to either increase or decrease the authority of sentencing courts or the department relating to supervision, except for those provisions instructing the court to apply the provisions of the current community custody law to offenders sentenced after July 1, 2009, but who committed their crime prior to August 1, 2009, to the extent that such application is constitutionally permissible.
This will effect a change for offenders who committed their crimes prior to the offender accountability act, chapter 196, Laws of 1999. These offenders will be ordered to a term of community custody rather than community placement or community supervision. To the extent constitutionally permissible, the terms of the offender's supervision will be as provided in current law. With the exception of this change, the legislature does not intend to make, and no provision of sections 7 through 58 of this act may be construed as making, a substantive change to the supervision provisions of the sentencing reform act." [ 2009 c 375 s 10; 2008 c 231 s 6.]
Application—2008 c 231 ss 6-58: "(1) Sections 6 through 58 of this act apply to all sentences imposed or reimposed on or after August 1, 2009, for any crime committed on or after August 1, 2009.
(2) Sections 6 through 58 of this act also apply to all sentences imposed or reimposed on or after August 1, 2009, for crimes committed prior to August 1, 2009, to the extent that such application is constitutionally permissible.
(3) To the extent that application of sections 6 through 58 of this act is not constitutionally permissible with respect to any offender, the sentence for such offender shall be governed by the law as it existed before August 1, 2009, or on such prior date as may be constitutionally required, notwithstanding any amendment or repeal of provisions of such law.
(4) If application of sections 6 through 58 of this act is not constitutionally permissible with respect to any offender, the judgment and sentence shall specify the particular sentencing provisions that will not apply to such offender. Whenever practical, the judgment and sentence shall use the terminology set out in this act.
(5) The sentencing guidelines commission shall prepare a summary of the circumstances under which application of sections 6 through 58 of this act is not constitutionally permissible. The summary should include recommendations of conditions that could be included in judgments and sentences in order to prevent unconstitutional application of the act. This summary shall be incorporated into the Adult Sentencing Guidelines Manual.
(6) Sections 6 through 58 of this act shall not affect the enforcement of any sentence that was imposed prior to August 1, 2009, unless the offender is resentenced after that date." [ 2008 c 231 s 55.]
Application of repealers—2008 c 231 s 57: "The repealers in section 57 of this act shall not affect the validity of any sentence that was imposed prior to August 1, 2009, or the authority of the department of corrections to supervise any offender pursuant to such sentence." [ 2008 c 231 s 58.]
Effective date—2008 c 231 ss 6-60: "Sections 6 through 60 of this act take effect August 1, 2009." [ 2008 c 231 s 61.]
Severability—2008 c 231: See note following RCW 9.94A.500.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 239 cases (67 in the last 5 years), 2009–2026 · leading case: State v. Bruch, 346 P.3d 724 (Wash. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Bruch, 346 P.3d 724 (Wash. 2015). · cites it 44× “The statutory scheme contemplates that an offender might serve more time in community custody than imposed by the sentencing court under RCW 9.94A.701 if he earns early release pursuant to RCW 9.”
State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 35× “3 ¶5 On February 9, 2010, Franklin moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, arguing that RCW 9.94A.701, a newly amended statute effective July 26,2009, entitled him to resentencing, even in light of Brooks.”
State Of Washington, V. Matthew Benjamin Labounty, 487 P.3d 221 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 13× “1 Under RCW 9.94A.701, the trial court also must impose a fixed term of community custody, with the length of that term depending on the offense committed.”
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Christopher Hood, App., 382 P.3d 710 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 11× “¶1 The community custody sentencing statute, RCW 9.94A.701, is not ambiguous with respect to which crimes have an 18-month term of community custody.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of McWilliams, 340 P.3d 223 (Wash. 2014). · cites it 13× “7 But, as the majority recognizes, the trial court was also prohibited from imposing a combined term of incarceration and community custody that exceeded the statutory maximum of 120 months.”
State v. Boyd, 275 P.3d 321 (Wash. 2012). · cites it 7× “701(9), 2 first enacted in 2009, the community custody term specified by RCW 9.94A.701 “shall be reduced by the court whenever an offender’s standard range term of confinement in combination with the term of community custody exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime.”
State v. Buck, 544 P.3d 506 (Wash. 2024). · cites it 27× “RCW 9.94A.701 outlines which offenses require the imposition of community custody and what the term length will be.”
State v. Winborne, 167 Wash. App. 320 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 12× “Most important here, it had added a new subsection (8) to RCW 9.94A.701 (later renumbered as subsection (9) by Laws of 2010, ch.”
State of Washington v. Michael Duke Coombes, 191 Wash. App. 241 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 9× “Coombes contends, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred by imposing a 36-month term of community custody under RCW 9.94A.701, where the law in effect at the time of the offense, former RCW 9.”
State v. Winborne, 273 P.3d 454 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 15× “Most important here, it had added a new subsection (8) to RCW 9.94A.701 (later renumbered as subsection (9) by Laws of 2010, ch.”
State v. Land, 295 P.3d 782 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “¶25 The controlling statute provides, The term of community custody specified by this section shall be reduced by the court whenever an offender’s standard range term of confinement in combination with the term of community custody exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime as…”
State v. Chouap, 285 P.3d 138 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “In his appellate brief, Chouap challenged his assault sentence, arguing that this court needed to remand for resentencing because the sentence exceeds the *127 statutory maximum under former RCW 9.94A.701(8) (2010), which provides: 3 The term of community custody specified by…”
Show all 239 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(1) — 31 cases
State v. Bruch, 346 P.3d 724 (Wash. 2015). “The statutory scheme contemplates that an offender might serve more time in community custody than imposed by the sentencing court under RCW 9.94A.701 if he earns early release pursuant to RCW 9.”
State Of Washington, V. Matthew Benjamin Labounty, 487 P.3d 221 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “1 Under RCW 9.94A.701, the trial court also must impose a fixed term of community custody, with the length of that term depending on the offense committed.”
State v. Buck, 544 P.3d 506 (Wash. 2024). “RCW 9.94A.701 outlines which offenses require the imposition of community custody and what the term length will be.”
State v. Snedden, 271 P.3d 298 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
State v. Winborne, 273 P.3d 454 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Most important here, it had added a new subsection (8) to RCW 9.94A.701 (later renumbered as subsection (9) by Laws of 2010, ch.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(1)(a) — 16 cases
State v. Buck, 544 P.3d 506 (Wash. 2024). “RCW 9.94A.701 outlines which offenses require the imposition of community custody and what the term length will be.”
In re Thompson, 429 P.3d 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Winkle, 245 P.3d 249 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
State of Washington v. Steven Allen Buck, 522 P.3d 1010 (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
Post Sentence Review Of: Michael P. Thompson & Ricky L. Carroll (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(1)(b) — 9 cases
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Christopher Hood, App., 382 P.3d 710 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “¶1 The community custody sentencing statute, RCW 9.94A.701, is not ambiguous with respect to which crimes have an 18-month term of community custody.”
Pers. Restraint Petition Of Kenneth Ramone Alston, 434 P.3d 1066 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
State of Washington v. Ben Alan Burkey (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State Of Washington, V Curtis Richard Fambro (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
In Re The Pers. Restraint Petition Of Dennis Carlos Oya (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(10) — 28 cases
State Of Washington, V. Suganthan Kathierson (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).
State Of Washington, V. Harlan W. Blackburn (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).
State Of Washington, V. Thomas Bostelle (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).
Pers. Restraint Petition Of Seth James Curran (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).
State of Washington v. Kyle L. Payment (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(2) — 23 cases
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Christopher Hood, App., 382 P.3d 710 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “¶1 The community custody sentencing statute, RCW 9.94A.701, is not ambiguous with respect to which crimes have an 18-month term of community custody.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of McWilliams, 340 P.3d 223 (Wash. 2014). “7 But, as the majority recognizes, the trial court was also prohibited from imposing a combined term of incarceration and community custody that exceeded the statutory maximum of 120 months.”
State Of Washington v. Emmanuel David Martinez (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Post Sentence Review Of Sircedric Antonio Gardner (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
State of Washington v. Demetrio Paz (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(3) — 7 cases
State Of Washington v. Mark A. Davis (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
State of Washington v. Demetrio Paz (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
State Of Washington, V Sopheap Chith (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
Post-sentence Petition Of Jill Robinson (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
Post Sentence Review Of: Adam M. Kelly (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(3)(a) — 34 cases
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Christopher Hood, App., 382 P.3d 710 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “¶1 The community custody sentencing statute, RCW 9.94A.701, is not ambiguous with respect to which crimes have an 18-month term of community custody.”
State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011). “3 ¶5 On February 9, 2010, Franklin moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, arguing that RCW 9.94A.701, a newly amended statute effective July 26,2009, entitled him to resentencing, even in light of Brooks.”
State v. Winborne, 167 Wash. App. 320 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Most important here, it had added a new subsection (8) to RCW 9.94A.701 (later renumbered as subsection (9) by Laws of 2010, ch.”
In re Thompson, 429 P.3d 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Winborne, 273 P.3d 454 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Most important here, it had added a new subsection (8) to RCW 9.94A.701 (later renumbered as subsection (9) by Laws of 2010, ch.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(3)(b) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Miguel Angel Montenegro (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(3)(c) — 9 cases
State Of Washington, V. Matthew Benjamin Labounty, 487 P.3d 221 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “1 Under RCW 9.94A.701, the trial court also must impose a fixed term of community custody, with the length of that term depending on the offense committed.”
State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011). “3 ¶5 On February 9, 2010, Franklin moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, arguing that RCW 9.94A.701, a newly amended statute effective July 26,2009, entitled him to resentencing, even in light of Brooks.”
State Of Washington v. Anthony G. Houck, 446 P.3d 646 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
State of Washington v. Scott Montgomery Nicholas (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
State of Washington v. Eric Allen Haggin (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(3)(d) — 2 cases
In re Thompson, 429 P.3d 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
Post Sentence Review Of: Michael P. Thompson & Ricky L. Carroll (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(4) — 4 cases
State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011). “3 ¶5 On February 9, 2010, Franklin moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, arguing that RCW 9.94A.701, a newly amended statute effective July 26,2009, entitled him to resentencing, even in light of Brooks.”
State Of Washington v. Taylor Alexandra Church, 428 P.3d 150 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
In re Postsentence Review of: Kelli Lynn Milne (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
State of Washington v. Daniel S. Burnett, Jr. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(8) — 14 cases
State v. Boyd, 275 P.3d 321 (Wash. 2012). “701(9), 2 first enacted in 2009, the community custody term specified by RCW 9.94A.701 “shall be reduced by the court whenever an offender’s standard range term of confinement in combination with the term of community custody exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime.”
State v. Chouap, 285 P.3d 138 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “In his appellate brief, Chouap challenged his assault sentence, arguing that this court needed to remand for resentencing because the sentence exceeds the *127 statutory maximum under former RCW 9.94A.701(8) (2010), which provides: 3 The term of community custody specified by…”
State v. Winkle, 245 P.3d 249 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
State v. Winkle, 159 Wash. App. 323 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
In Re Brooks, 211 P.3d 1023 (Wash. 2009).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(8)(2008) — 1 case
State v. Winkle, 245 P.3d 249 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(9) — 113 cases
State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011). “3 ¶5 On February 9, 2010, Franklin moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, arguing that RCW 9.94A.701, a newly amended statute effective July 26,2009, entitled him to resentencing, even in light of Brooks.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of McWilliams, 340 P.3d 223 (Wash. 2014). “7 But, as the majority recognizes, the trial court was also prohibited from imposing a combined term of incarceration and community custody that exceeded the statutory maximum of 120 months.”
State v. Bruch, 346 P.3d 724 (Wash. 2015). “The statutory scheme contemplates that an offender might serve more time in community custody than imposed by the sentencing court under RCW 9.94A.701 if he earns early release pursuant to RCW 9.”
State v. Boyd, 275 P.3d 321 (Wash. 2012). “701(9), 2 first enacted in 2009, the community custody term specified by RCW 9.94A.701 “shall be reduced by the court whenever an offender’s standard range term of confinement in combination with the term of community custody exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime.”
State Of Washington, V. Matthew Benjamin Labounty, 487 P.3d 221 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “1 Under RCW 9.94A.701, the trial court also must impose a fixed term of community custody, with the length of that term depending on the offense committed.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(l) — 4 cases
State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011). “3 ¶5 On February 9, 2010, Franklin moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, arguing that RCW 9.94A.701, a newly amended statute effective July 26,2009, entitled him to resentencing, even in light of Brooks.”
State v. Bruch, 346 P.3d 724 (Wash. 2015). “The statutory scheme contemplates that an offender might serve more time in community custody than imposed by the sentencing court under RCW 9.94A.701 if he earns early release pursuant to RCW 9.”
State v. Winborne, 167 Wash. App. 320 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Most important here, it had added a new subsection (8) to RCW 9.94A.701 (later renumbered as subsection (9) by Laws of 2010, ch.”
State of Washington v. Ignacio Junior Salazar (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(l)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Bruch, 346 P.3d 724 (Wash. 2015). “The statutory scheme contemplates that an offender might serve more time in community custody than imposed by the sentencing court under RCW 9.94A.701 if he earns early release pursuant to RCW 9.”
State v. Winkle, 159 Wash. App. 323 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
State Of Washington, V Franklin Hershel Wilcox, 383 P.3d 549 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.701(l)(b) — 2 cases
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Christopher Hood, App., 382 P.3d 710 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “¶1 The community custody sentencing statute, RCW 9.94A.701, is not ambiguous with respect to which crimes have an 18-month term of community custody.”
State of Washington v. Michael Duke Coombes, 191 Wash. App. 241 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “Coombes contends, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred by imposing a 36-month term of community custody under RCW 9.94A.701, where the law in effect at the time of the offense, former RCW 9.”
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.