Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9 · Chapter 9.95
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.200 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
After conviction by plea or verdict of guilty of any crime, the court upon application or its own motion, may summarily grant or deny probation, or at a subsequent time fixed may hear and determine, in the presence of the defendant, the matter of probation of the defendant, and the conditions of such probation, if granted. The court may, in its discretion, prior to the hearing on the granting of probation, refer the matter to the secretary of corrections or such officers as the secretary may designate for investigation and report to the court at a specified time, upon the circumstances surrounding the crime and concerning the defendant, his or her prior record, and his or her family surroundings and environment.
[ 2011 c 336 s 340; 1981 c 136 s 41; 1979 c 141 s 6; 1967 c 134 s 15; 1957 c 227 s 3. Prior: 1949 c 59 s 1; 1939 c 125 s 1, part; 1935 c 114 s 5; Rem. Supp. 1949 s 10249-5a.]

Notes:

Rules of court: ER 410.
Effective date—1981 c 136: See RCW 72.09.900.
Severability—1939 c 125: "If any section or provision of this act shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of this act as a whole, or of any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional." [1939 c 125 s 3 p 356.]
Suspending sentences: RCW 9.92.060.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 62 cases, 1953–2019 · leading case: State v. Sargent, 762 P.2d 1127 (Wash. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Sargent, 762 P.2d 1127 (Wash. 1988). · cites it 4× “FACTS Following Sargent's first conviction on charges of murder and arson, the trial judge ordered a presentence report pursuant to RCW 9.95.200 and former CrR 7.2(b). Ronald Bloom, a probation officer for the King County Corrections Department, was assigned to prepare the…”
State v. McCullum, 622 P.2d 873 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 6× “He also assigns error to the trial judge's refusal to consider probation for McCullum pursuant to RCW 9.95.200. The evidence established that McCullum stabbed William Slater to death on March 23, 1978, in the bar of the Cottage Inn Restaurant in Seattle.”
State v. Cunningham, 633 P.2d 886 (Wash. 1981). · cites it 2× “It reads in full: After conviction by plea or verdict of guilty of any crime, the court upon application or its own motion, may summarily grant or deny probation, or at a subsequent time fixed may hear and determine, in the presence of the defendant, the matter of probation of…”
Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128 (1967). “He was then placed on probation for two years on the condition, inter alia, that he first spend 30 days in the county jail, and the imposition of sentence was deferred pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code §§ 9.95.200 , 9.95.210. 1 About four months later the Spokane County prosecuting…”
Johnson v. State, 925 So. 2d 86 (Miss. 2006). “060, which we will refer to as the Suspended Sentence Act, and under the provisions made in the Prison Terms, Paroles and Probation Act, which we will refer to herein as the Probation Act (RCW 9.95.200 through 9.95.250). Generally speaking, our superior courts use the former…”
State v. Schmidt, 23 P.3d 462 (Wash. 2001). “410, who received a probationary sentence under RCW 9.95.200, and who received a dismissal of the charge under RCW 9.”
Morris v. Blaker, 821 P.2d 482 (Wash. 1992). “410, who received a probationary sentence ixnder RCW 9.95.200, and who received a dismissal of the charge under RCW 9.”
State v. Hall, 666 P.2d 930 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “In contrast to the Legislature's use of "shall" in establishing a reporting requirement, the Legislature used "may" with reference to granting or denying probation, RCW 9.95.200, suspending sentence, imprisoning the defendant in the county jail, ordering payment of fines or…”
Couch v. Dep't of Corr., 54 P.3d 197 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “, RCW 9.95.200 (court may summarily grant or deny probation and may determine the conditions of such probation); RCW 9.”
State v. Alberts, 754 P.2d 128 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “On October 23, 1985, the trial court entered an order deferring imposition of his sentence for a period of 1 year pursuant to RCW 9.95.200. A condition of probation was that Alberts pay restitution in the amount of $657.”
State v. Parsley, 870 P.2d 1030 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “On August 5, 1981, the court deferred imposing a sentence for 5 years pursuant to RCW 9.95.200 on the condition that, among other things, Parsley be on probation for 5 years and pay $7,334 in restitution.”
State v. Shannon, 376 P.2d 646 (Wash. 1962). · cites it 2× “This is an appeal by defendant Attebery from a judgment and sentence, following revocation of probation under a deferred sentence imposed pursuant to RCW 9.95.200, 9.95.210, 9.95.220, 9.95.230.”
Show all 62 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.200(1) — 1 case
Couch v. Wa. Dep't of Corr., 54 P.3d 197 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
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.