Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

When a court sentences a person to a term of community custody, the court shall impose conditions of community custody as provided in this section.

(1) Mandatory conditions. As part of any term of community custody, the court shall:

(a) Require the offender to inform the department of court-ordered treatment upon request by the department;

(b) Require the offender to comply with any conditions imposed by the department under RCW 9.94A.704;

(c) If the offender was sentenced under RCW 9.94A.507 for an offense listed in RCW 9.94A.507(1)(a), and the victim of the offense was under 18 years of age at the time of the offense, prohibit the offender from residing in a community protection zone;

(d) If the offender was sentenced under RCW 9A.36.120, prohibit the offender from serving in any paid or volunteer capacity where he or she has control or supervision of minors under the age of 13.

(2) Waivable conditions. Unless waived by the court, as part of any term of community custody, the court shall order an offender to:

(a) Report to and be available for contact with the assigned community corrections officer as directed;

(b) Work at department-approved education, employment, or community restitution, or any combination thereof;

(d) Obtain prior approval of the department for the offender's residence location and living arrangements.

(3) Discretionary conditions. As part of any term of community custody, the court may order an offender to:

(a) Remain within, or outside of, a specified geographical boundary;

(b) Refrain from direct or indirect contact with the victim of the crime or a specified class of individuals;

(d) Participate in rehabilitative programs or otherwise perform affirmative conduct reasonably related to the circumstances of the offense, the offender's risk of reoffending, or the safety of the community;

(e) Refrain from possessing or consuming alcohol; or

(f) Comply with any crime-related prohibitions.

(4) Special conditions.

(a) In sentencing an offender convicted of a crime of domestic violence, as defined in RCW 10.99.020, if the offender has a minor child, or if the victim of the offense for which the offender was convicted has a minor child, the court may order the offender to participate in a domestic violence perpetrator program approved under RCW 43.20A.735.

(b)(i) In sentencing an offender convicted of an alcohol or drug-related traffic offense, the court shall require the offender to complete a diagnostic evaluation by a substance use disorder treatment program approved by the department of social and health services or a qualified probation department, defined under RCW 46.61.516, that has been approved by the department of social and health services. If the offense was pursuant to chapter 46.61 RCW, the report shall be forwarded to the department of licensing. If the offender is found to have an alcohol or drug problem that requires treatment, the offender shall complete treatment in an approved substance use disorder treatment program as defined in chapter 71.24 RCW. If the offender is found not to have an alcohol or drug problem that requires treatment, the offender shall complete a course in an alcohol and drug information school licensed or certified by the department of health under *chapter 70.96A RCW. The offender shall pay all costs for any evaluation, education, or treatment required by this section, unless the offender is eligible for an existing program offered or approved by the department of social and health services.

(ii) For purposes of this section, "alcohol or drug-related traffic offense" means the following: Driving while under the influence as defined by RCW 46.61.502, actual physical control while under the influence as defined by RCW 46.61.504, vehicular homicide as defined by RCW 46.61.520(1)(a), vehicular assault as defined by RCW 46.61.522(1)(b), homicide by watercraft as defined by RCW 79A.60.050, or assault by watercraft as defined by RCW 79A.60.060.

(iii) This subsection (4)(b) does not require the department of social and health services to add new treatment or assessment facilities nor affect its use of existing programs and facilities authorized by law.

(5)(a) On the motion of the offender, following the offender's release from total confinement, the court may amend the substantive conditions of community custody imposed by the court.

(b) The offender shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a substantial change in circumstances such that the condition of community custody is no longer necessary for community safety. In determining whether there has been a substantial change in circumstances, the court may not base its determination solely on the fact that time has passed without a violation.

(c) An offender may file a motion to modify substantive conditions of community custody imposed by the court no more than once in every 12-month period that the order is in effect, starting from the date of the order.

(d) The time limit for collateral attacks established under RCW 10.73.090 does not apply to any motion filed pursuant to this subsection.

(e) A motion under this subsection may not reopen the offender's conviction to challenges that would otherwise be barred by RCW 10.73.090, 10.73.100, 10.73.140, or other procedural barriers.

[ 2024 c 118 s 2; 2022 c 29 s 8; (2022 c 29 s 7 expired July 1, 2022); 2021 c 215 s 104; 2018 c 201 s 9004; 2015 c 81 s 3. Prior: 2009 c 214 s 3; 2009 c 28 s 11; 2008 c 231 s 9.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: Chapter 70.96A RCW was repealed and/or recodified in its entirety pursuant to 2016 sp.s. c 29 ss 301, 601, and 701.

Application—Effective date—2024 c 118: See notes following RCW 9.94A.704.

Effective date—2022 c 29 s 8: "Section 8 of this act takes effect July 1, 2022." [ 2022 c 29 s 17.]

Expiration date—2022 c 29 s 7: "Section 7 of this act expires July 1, 2022." [ 2022 c 29 s 16.]

Housing voucher program outcome evaluation and benefit-cost analysis—Transfer of residual funds to the general fund—2022 c 29: See notes following RCW 9.94A.729.

Effective date—2022 c 268; 2021 c 215: See note following RCW 7.105.900.

Findings—Intent—Effective date—2018 c 201: See notes following RCW 41.05.018.

Short title—2009 c 214: "This act shall be known as the Eryk Woodruff public safety act of 2009." [ 2009 c 214 s 1.]

Effective date—2009 c 214: "This act takes effect August 1, 2009." [ 2009 c 214 s 4.]

Effective date—2009 c 28: See note following RCW 2.24.040.

Intent—Application—Application of repealers—Effective date—2008 c 231: See notes following RCW 9.94A.701.

Severability—2008 c 231: See note following RCW 9.94A.500.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 467 cases (252 in the last 5 years), 2009–2026 · leading case: State of Washington v. Joseph Edward Geyer, 496 P.3d 322 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State of Washington v. Joseph Edward Geyer, 496 P.3d 322 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 13× ““When a court sentences a person to a term of community custody, RCW 9.94A.703 requires that it impose conditions of community custody.”

State Of Washington v. Adrian Munoz Rivera, 361 P.3d 182 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 12× “703(3)4 permits courts to impose certain discretionary conditions as part of any term of community custody, including requiring the defendant to: (b) Refrain from direct or indirect contact with the victim of the crime or a specified class of individuals; (c) Participate in…”

State of Washington v. Kevin Arther Peters, 455 P.3d 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “RCW 9.94A.703. The act identifies certain conditions as mandatory, others as waivable, and others as discretionary.”

State Of Washington v. Eli Mansour, 470 P.3d 543 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 9× “3d 701 (2020) (footnote omitted); RCW 9.94A.703(1)-(3). “A court is authorized to impose discretionary community custody conditions as part of a sentence.”

State Of Washington v. Jason Spaulding, 476 P.3d 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “53253-1-II RCW 9.94A.703(2)(d) governs the community custody supervision assessment and states, “Unless waived by the court, as part of any term of community custody, the court shall order an offender to .”

State Of Washington, V. James Laron Ellis, 530 P.3d 1048 (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “5 Effective July 2022, RCW 9.94A.703(2) no longer authorizes the imposition of community custody supervision fees.”

State Of Washington v. Anthony G. Houck, 446 P.3d 646 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 8× “A court may impose a condition requiring an offender to refrain from direct or indirect contact with a specified class of individuals.”

State v. Hai Minh Nguyen, 425 P.3d 847 (Wash. 2018). “" RCW 9.94A.703(3)(f). A " '[c]rime-related prohibition' means an order of a court prohibiting conduct that directly relates to the circumstances of the crime for which the offender has been convicted.”

State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “Relying on RCW 9.94A.703(2)(c), he argues the condition must be amended to reflect the statute's qualifier, "except pursuant to lawfully issued prescriptions.”

State v. Kinzle, 326 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “RCW 9.94A.703(2)(b), (e). ¶37 Kinzle challenges the imposition of two fees required by statute.”

State v. Padilla, 416 P.3d 712 (Wash. 2018). “We reverse the Court of Appeals' decision upholding the condition and remand to the trial court for further definition of the term "nomographic materials" following a determination of whether the restriction is narrowly tailored based on Padilla's conviction ¶ 19 In light of the…”

State v. Cates, 354 P.3d 832 (Wash. 2015). · cites it 2× “4 Cates also challenged the condition’s computer inspection component 5 on statutory grounds, arguing that the component violated *538 RCW 9.94A.703 6 because it was a non-crime-related prohibition.”

Show all 467 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(1) — 18 cases

State of Washington v. Joseph Edward Geyer, 496 P.3d 322 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). ““When a court sentences a person to a term of community custody, RCW 9.94A.703 requires that it impose conditions of community custody.”

State Of Washington v. Eli Mansour, 470 P.3d 543 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “3d 701 (2020) (footnote omitted); RCW 9.94A.703(1)-(3). “A court is authorized to impose discretionary community custody conditions as part of a sentence.”

State Of Washington, V. Freedom A. Dela-llana (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

State Of Washington v. Clifton Turner (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

State v. Petterson (Wash. 2018).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(1)(b) — 23 cases

State Of Washington, V. Kevin Wayne Houser, 544 P.3d 564 (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).

State Of Washington, V. Antonio Ortega, 506 P.3d 1287 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).

In Re The Pers. Restraint Petition Of Brian Strong (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

Pers. Restraint Petition Of Shawn E. Ennis (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).

State Of Washington, V. Kevin Lars Lundstrom (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(1)(c) — 4 cases

State of Washington v. Kevin Arther Peters, 455 P.3d 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “RCW 9.94A.703. The act identifies certain conditions as mandatory, others as waivable, and others as discretionary.”

State Of Washington, Resp/x-app. V. Anthony L. Ludlow, App/x-resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

State of Washington v. Edward Lane Hart (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

State of Washington v. Jasper James Nelson (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(2) — 64 cases

State Of Washington v. George Abraham Dillon, 456 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).

State v. Winterstein, 220 P.3d 1226 (Wash. 2009).

State v. Winterstein, 167 Wash. 2d 620 (Wash. 2009).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(2)(a) — 1 case

State Of Washington, V David Haas (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(2)(b) — 7 cases

State v. Kinzle, 326 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “RCW 9.94A.703(2)(b), (e). ¶37 Kinzle challenges the imposition of two fees required by statute.”

State of Washington v. Scott Alexis Casimiro, 438 P.3d 137 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

State Of Washington, V. Joaquim Damall Zytavion Fryson (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(2)(c) — 61 cases

State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “Relying on RCW 9.94A.703(2)(c), he argues the condition must be amended to reflect the statute's qualifier, "except pursuant to lawfully issued prescriptions.”

State Of Washington v. Anthony G. Houck, 446 P.3d 646 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “A court may impose a condition requiring an offender to refrain from direct or indirect contact with a specified class of individuals.”

Pers. Restraint Petition Of Jeffrey Scott Brettell, 430 P.3d 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

State of Washington v. Craig Lloyd Schillreff (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(2)(d) — 123 cases

State Of Washington v. Jason Spaulding, 476 P.3d 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “53253-1-II RCW 9.94A.703(2)(d) governs the community custody supervision assessment and states, “Unless waived by the court, as part of any term of community custody, the court shall order an offender to .”

State Of Washington, V William Edward Lundstrom, 429 P.3d 1116 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

State Of Washington v. Leona Ruth Starr, 479 P.3d 1209 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).

State of Washington v. Deshawn Isaiah Anderson, 497 P.3d 880 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(2)(e) — 2 cases

Pers. Restraint Petition Of: David James Damon Alexander (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

State Of Washington v. Jeffrey Michael Kinzle (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3) — 39 cases

State Of Washington v. Adrian Munoz Rivera, 361 P.3d 182 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “703(3)4 permits courts to impose certain discretionary conditions as part of any term of community custody, including requiring the defendant to: (b) Refrain from direct or indirect contact with the victim of the crime or a specified class of individuals; (c) Participate in…”

State v. Cates, 354 P.3d 832 (Wash. 2015). “4 Cates also challenged the condition’s computer inspection component 5 on statutory grounds, arguing that the component violated *538 RCW 9.94A.703 6 because it was a non-crime-related prohibition.”

State of Washington v. Brandon Jerald Johnson, 421 P.3d 969 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

State Of Washington, V. Joshua Robert Duran (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(A) — 1 case

State Of Washington, V. Kevin Lars Lundstrom (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(a) — 9 cases

Pers. Restraint Petition Of Greg Martinez, 413 P.3d 1043 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

State of Washington v. Reymundo Izaak Hernandez (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

State of Washington v. Ferencz Gabor Verebi (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

State Of Washington, Respondent/cr-appellant v. Jericho Hanmmerquist, Appellant/cr-respondent (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(b) — 35 cases

State v. Kinzle, 326 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “RCW 9.94A.703(2)(b), (e). ¶37 Kinzle challenges the imposition of two fees required by statute.”

Pers. Restraint Petition Of Jeffrey Scott Brettell, 430 P.3d 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(c) — 52 cases

State v. Warnock, 299 P.3d 1173 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).

State Of Washington, V. Antonio Ortega, 506 P.3d 1287 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).

State Of Washington v. Randall Blackman (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(d) — 28 cases

State v. Button, 339 P.3d 182 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).

State Of Washington v. Randall Blackman (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

In the Matter of the Pers. Restraint of: Juan Luna Huezo (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

State Of Washington, V. Thomas Burrill (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(e) — 54 cases

State Of Washington, V. Paul Thomas Clark (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

State Of Washington v. Dominique Debra Norris (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(e)(2009) — 1 case

State Of Washington v. Pablo Santos-santiago (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(3)(f) — 139 cases

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(4) — 1 case

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(4)(a) — 2 cases

State Of Washington v. Elliott Rudolph (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

State of Washington v. Francisco J. Soria Nanamkin (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(5) — 2 cases

State Of Washington, V. Richard W. Wilke (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).

State Of Washington, V. Jesse L. Hartman (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(5)(a) — 1 case

Pers. Restraint Petition Of: Matthew Dale Clark Reavis (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(5)(b) — 1 case

State Of Washington, V David Haas (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(5)(d) — 1 case

Pers. Restraint Petition Of Raymond H Moultrie (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(5)(e) — 1 case

Pers. Restraint Petition Of Raymond H Moultrie (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(c) — 2 cases

State Of Washington v. Elliott Rudolph (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

State Of Washington v. Randall Blackman (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(d) — 1 case

State of Washington v. Julian Jesus Garcia (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(f) — 4 cases

In Re The Pers. Restraint Petition Of Jeremy Thomas Stevens (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

State Of Washington v. Shawn Morgan (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

State of Washington v. Michael D. Blanchard (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

State Of Washington, V. Rodney Ray Dotson (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.703(l)(b) — 2 cases

State v. Petterson (Wash. 2018).

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.