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

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.835 (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) The prosecuting attorney shall file a special allegation of sexual motivation in every criminal case, felony, gross misdemeanor, or misdemeanor, other than sex offenses as defined in RCW 9.94A.030 when sufficient admissible evidence exists, which, when considered with the most plausible, reasonably foreseeable defense that could be raised under the evidence, would justify a finding of sexual motivation by a reasonable and objective fact finder.
(2) In a criminal case wherein there has been a special allegation the state shall prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime with a sexual motivation. The court shall make a finding of fact of whether or not a sexual motivation was present at the time of the commission of the crime, or if a jury trial is had, the jury shall, if it finds the defendant guilty, also find a special verdict as to whether or not the defendant committed the crime with a sexual motivation. This finding shall not be applied to sex offenses as defined in RCW 9.94A.030.
(3) The prosecuting attorney shall not withdraw the special allegation of sexual motivation without approval of the court through an order of dismissal of the special allegation. The court shall not dismiss this special allegation unless it finds that such an order is necessary to correct an error in the initial charging decision or unless there are evidentiary problems which make proving the special allegation doubtful.
[ 2009 c 28 s 15; 2006 c 123 s 2; 1999 c 143 s 11; 1990 c 3 s 601. Formerly RCW 9.94A.127.]

Notes:

Effective date—2009 c 28: See note following RCW 2.24.040.
Effective date—2006 c 123: See note following RCW 9.94A.533.
Effective date—Application—1990 c 3 ss 601-605: "(1) Sections 601 through 605 of this act, for purposes of sentencing adult or juvenile offenders, shall take effect July 1, 1990, and shall apply to crimes or offenses committed on or after July 1, 1990.
(2) For purposes of defining a "sexually violent offense" pursuant to section 1002(4) of this act, sections 601 through 605 of this act shall take effect July 1, 1990, and shall apply to crimes committed on, before, or after July 1, 1990." [ 1990 c 3 s 606.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 58 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: State v. Rice, 279 P.3d 849 (Wash. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rice, 279 P.3d 849 (Wash. 2012). · cites it 12× “She also abducted the same 10-year-old boy and was convicted of kidnapping with special allegations under RCW 9.94A.835 and .837 for sexual motivation and for having a victim under age 15.”
State v. Rice, 159 Wash. App. 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 16× “¶1 — At a bench trial on stipulated facts, the trial court found former Tacoma Public School District elementary school teacher Jennifer Rice guilty of (1) first degree kidnapping, which involved special allegations of sexual motivation under former RCW 9.94A.835 (2006) and a…”
State v. Goins, 92 P.3d 181 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 6× “127 (1999), recodified as RCW 9.94A.835. Defense counsel did not challenge the apparently contradictory verdicts, and Goins was sentenced according to his conviction.”
State v. Goins, 151 Wash. 2d 728 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 6× “127 (1999), recodified as RCW 9.94A.835. Defense counsel did not challenge the apparently contradictory verdicts, and Goins was sentenced according to his conviction.”
State v. Murray, 416 P.3d 1225 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 4× “535(3)(f): see also RCW 9.94A.835. The sexual motivation aggravator is based on the recommendation of the former Governor's Task Force on Community Protection.”
State v. Meacham, 225 P.3d 472 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 12× “Former RCW 9.94A.835 does not mention the defendant’s right to bring a motion to dismiss the special allegation.”
State v. Rice, 246 P.3d 234 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 16× “¶ 1 At a bench trial on stipulated facts, the trial court found former Tacoma Public School District elementary school teacher Jennifer Rice guilty of (1) first degree kidnapping, which involved special allegations of sexual motivation under former RCW 9.94A.835 (2006) and a…”
State v. Pillatos, 150 P.3d 1130 (Wash. 2007). “A Spokane County Superior Court judge permitted the State to amend the information to add the additional aggravating factor of sexual *1134 motivation, concluding that she had statutory authority to do so under RCW 9.94A.835. She declined, however, to permit the information to…”
State v. Pillatos, 159 Wash. 2d 459 (Wash. 2007). “A Spokane County Superior Court judge permitted the State to amend the information to add the additional aggravating factor of sexual motivation, concluding that she had statutory authority to do so under RCW 9.94A.835. She declined, however, to permit the information to be…”
State v. Thompson, 290 P.3d 996 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Thompson suggests that because Deborah called a friend late at night with plans to buy crack, she was not asleep when she was attacked. But the State argued she likely “was asleep in the mid-to late morning of August 23, 2004, to be awakened by a man by the name of Curtis…”
State v. Borboa, 102 P.3d 183 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “535, a sentence outside the standard range must be based on "substantial and compelling reasons" that were not considered when the standard range was set, [5] including but not limited to a finding of sexual motivation under RCW 9.94A.835. [6] When the trial court's standard or…”
State v. Flores, 164 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2008). “535(2)(f), listing sexual motivation as an aggravating factor, also is still valid because RCW 9.94A.835 requires a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that sexual motivation was present.”
Show all 58 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.835(1) — 13 cases
State v. Murray, 416 P.3d 1225 (Wash. 2018). “535(3)(f): see also RCW 9.94A.835. The sexual motivation aggravator is based on the recommendation of the former Governor's Task Force on Community Protection.”
State v. Thompson, 290 P.3d 996 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “Thompson suggests that because Deborah called a friend late at night with plans to buy crack, she was not asleep when she was attacked. But the State argued she likely “was asleep in the mid-to late morning of August 23, 2004, to be awakened by a man by the name of Curtis…”
State v. Rice, 279 P.3d 849 (Wash. 2012). “She also abducted the same 10-year-old boy and was convicted of kidnapping with special allegations under RCW 9.94A.835 and .837 for sexual motivation and for having a victim under age 15.”
State v. Vars, 157 Wash. App. 482 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
State v. Rice, 159 Wash. App. 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “¶1 — At a bench trial on stipulated facts, the trial court found former Tacoma Public School District elementary school teacher Jennifer Rice guilty of (1) first degree kidnapping, which involved special allegations of sexual motivation under former RCW 9.94A.835 (2006) and a…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.835(2) — 8 cases
State v. Borboa, 102 P.3d 183 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “535, a sentence outside the standard range must be based on "substantial and compelling reasons" that were not considered when the standard range was set, [5] including but not limited to a finding of sexual motivation under RCW 9.94A.835. [6] When the trial court's standard or…”
State v. Meacham, 225 P.3d 472 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “Former RCW 9.94A.835 does not mention the defendant’s right to bring a motion to dismiss the special allegation.”
State Of Washington v. Terrence Patrick Eckhart (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
State Of Washington v. Michael Murray (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
State Of Washington v. Michael Degalvez Williamson (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94A.835(3) — 4 cases
State v. Meacham, 225 P.3d 472 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “Former RCW 9.94A.835 does not mention the defendant’s right to bring a motion to dismiss the special allegation.”
State v. Rice, 159 Wash. App. 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “¶1 — At a bench trial on stipulated facts, the trial court found former Tacoma Public School District elementary school teacher Jennifer Rice guilty of (1) first degree kidnapping, which involved special allegations of sexual motivation under former RCW 9.94A.835 (2006) and a…”
State v. Rice, 246 P.3d 234 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “¶ 1 At a bench trial on stipulated facts, the trial court found former Tacoma Public School District elementary school teacher Jennifer Rice guilty of (1) first degree kidnapping, which involved special allegations of sexual motivation under former RCW 9.94A.835 (2006) and a…”
State Of Washington v. Michael Degalvez Williamson (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
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.