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

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.709 (2026)

Community custody—Sex offenders—Conditions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) At any time prior to the completion or termination of a sex offender's term of community custody, if the court finds that public safety would be enhanced, the court may impose and enforce an order extending any or all of the conditions of community custody for a period up to the maximum allowable sentence for the crime as it is classified in chapter 9A.20 RCW, regardless of the expiration of the offender's term of community custody.
(2)(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.
(3) If a violation of a condition extended under this section occurs after the expiration of the offender's term of community custody, it shall be deemed a violation of the sentence for the purposes of RCW 9.94A.631 and may be punishable as contempt of court as provided for in RCW 7.21.040.
(4) If the court extends a condition beyond the expiration of the term of community custody, the department is not responsible for supervision of the offender's compliance with the condition.
[ 2024 c 118 s 3; 2008 c 231 s 14.]

Notes:

Application—Effective date—2024 c 118: See notes following RCW 9.94A.704.
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 8 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2012–2026 · leading case: State v. Price, 281 P.3d 331 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Price, 281 P.3d 331 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 8× “Price appeals the trial court’s 2011 decision under RCW 9.94A.709 to extend one of his 2004 community custody conditions imposed in his first degree child molestation conviction.”
Pers. Restraint Petition Of: Matthew Dale Clark Reavis (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “703 and RCW 9.94A.709. RCW 10.73.100(6). This exception took effect in March 2024.”
State Of Washington, V. Paul Thomas Clark (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Importantly, after Hubbard was published and after briefing was completed in this case, the legislature amended RCW 9.94A.709 to allow sex offenders to petition for modification of their community custody conditions upon a showing of substantial change of circumstances.”
State Of Washington, V. Jeremiah Jeffries-porter (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “If Jeffries- Porter fathers a child between now and when his community custody term ends, he may seek modification of this condition through the mechanism provided by RCW 9.94A.709(2)(a).8 Accordingly, because Jeffries-Porter’s challenge to this community custody condition…”
Post-sentence Petition Of Hagos Hapte Hadgu (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “This constituted an extraordinary circumstance warranting modification of the sentence because it was "unforeseeable and unanticipated" at the time of sentencing and the sentencing court would not have imposed a nine-month sentence if it had expected the 15 (Emphasis added.”
State of Washington v. Ferencz Gabor Verebi (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Verebi may seek modification of the condition via the mechanism provided in RCW 9.94A.709(2)(a) if he does have a child while on community custody.”
State of Washington v. Christopher Quinton L. Harris (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Harris may seek modification of the condition via the mechanism provided in RCW 9.94A.709(2)(a) if he does have a child while on community custody.”
State of Washington v. Dustin W. Kiernan (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). “See Bosley, 118 Wn.2d at, 809. As pointed out by the State, a decision by this court to decline to address these conditions would not deprive Kiernan of an opportunity to later seek review.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.709(1): 1 case
State v. Price, 281 P.3d 331 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Price appeals the trial court’s 2011 decision under RCW 9.94A.709 to extend one of his 2004 community custody conditions imposed in his first degree child molestation conviction.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.709(2): 1 case
State of Washington v. Dustin W. Kiernan (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). “See Bosley, 118 Wn.2d at, 809. As pointed out by the State, a decision by this court to decline to address these conditions would not deprive Kiernan of an opportunity to later seek review.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.709(2)(a): 5 cases
State Of Washington, V. Jeremiah Jeffries-porter (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “If Jeffries- Porter fathers a child between now and when his community custody term ends, he may seek modification of this condition through the mechanism provided by RCW 9.94A.709(2)(a).8 Accordingly, because Jeffries-Porter’s challenge to this community custody condition…”
Pers. Restraint Petition Of: Matthew Dale Clark Reavis (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “703 and RCW 9.94A.709. RCW 10.73.100(6). This exception took effect in March 2024.”
State Of Washington, V. Paul Thomas Clark (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Importantly, after Hubbard was published and after briefing was completed in this case, the legislature amended RCW 9.94A.709 to allow sex offenders to petition for modification of their community custody conditions upon a showing of substantial change of circumstances.”
State of Washington v. Ferencz Gabor Verebi (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Verebi may seek modification of the condition via the mechanism provided in RCW 9.94A.709(2)(a) if he does have a child while on community custody.”
State of Washington v. Christopher Quinton L. Harris (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Harris may seek modification of the condition via the mechanism provided in RCW 9.94A.709(2)(a) if he does have a child while on community custody.”
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.