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

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.772 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, monthly payment or starting dates set by the court, the county clerk, or the department before or after October 1, 2003, shall not be construed as a limitation on the due date or amount of legal financial obligations, which may be immediately collected by civil means and shall not be construed as a limitation for purposes of credit reporting. Monthly payments and commencement dates are to be construed to be applicable solely as a limitation upon the deprivation of an offender's liberty for nonpayment.
[ 2004 c 121 s 4; 2003 c 379 s 22.]

Notes:

Severability—Effective dates—2003 c 379: See notes following RCW 9.94A.728.
Intent—Purpose—2003 c 379 ss 13-27: See note following RCW 9.94A.760.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2005–2011 · leading case: In Re Pierce, 268 P.3d 907 (Wash. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Pierce, 268 P.3d 907 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 5× “The court rejected this argument relying on RCW 9.94A.772, which provides in relevant part: "Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, monthly payment or starting dates set by the court, the county clerk, or the department before or after October 1, *915 2003, shall not…”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Pierce, 173 Wash. 2d 372 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 5× “The court rejected this argument relying on RCW 9.94A.772, which provides in relevant part: “Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, monthly payment or starting dates set by the court, the county clerk, or the department before or after October 1, 2003, shall not be…”
In Re Martin, 118 P.3d 387 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 18× “Angulo and RCW 9.94A.772 ¶ 4 Relying on Angulo , Martin asserts that he is unlawfully restrained within the meaning of RAP 16.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Martin, 129 Wash. App. 135 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 18× “Angulo and RCW 9.94A.772 ¶4 Relying on Angulo , Martin asserts that he is unlawfully restrained within the meaning of RAP 16.”
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.