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

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210 (2026)

Conditions of probation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection in granting probation, the superior court may suspend the imposition or the execution of the sentence and may direct that the suspension may continue upon such conditions and for such time as it shall designate, not exceeding the maximum term of sentence or two years, whichever is longer.
(b) For a defendant sentenced for a domestic violence offense, or under RCW 46.61.5055, the superior court may suspend the imposition or the execution of the sentence and may direct that the suspension continue upon such conditions and for such time as the court shall designate, not to exceed five years. The court shall have continuing jurisdiction and authority to suspend the execution of all or any part of the sentence upon stated terms, including installment payment of fines. A defendant who has been sentenced, and who then fails to appear for any hearing to address the defendant's compliance with the terms of probation when ordered to do so by the court shall have the term of probation tolled until such time as the defendant makes his or her presence known to the court on the record. Any time before entering an order terminating probation, the court may modify or revoke its order suspending the imposition or execution of the sentence if the defendant violates or fails to carry out any of the conditions of the suspended sentence.
(2) In the order granting probation and as a condition thereof, the superior court may in its discretion imprison the defendant in the county jail for a period not exceeding one year and may fine the defendant any sum not exceeding the statutory limit for the offense committed, and court costs. As a condition of probation, the superior court may require the defendant to make such monetary payments, on such terms as it deems appropriate under the circumstances, as are necessary: (a) To comply with any order of the court for the payment of family support; (b) to make restitution to any person or persons who may have suffered loss or damage by reason of the commission of the crime in question or when the offender pleads guilty to a lesser offense or fewer offenses and agrees with the prosecutor's recommendation that the offender be required to pay restitution to a victim of an offense or offenses which are not prosecuted pursuant to a plea agreement; (c) to pay such fine as may be imposed and court costs, including reimbursement of the state for costs of extradition if return to this state by extradition was required; (d) following consideration of the financial condition of the person subject to possible electronic monitoring, to pay for the costs of electronic monitoring if that monitoring was required by the court as a condition of release from custody or as a condition of probation; (e) to contribute to a county or interlocal drug fund; and (f) to make restitution to a public agency for the costs of an emergency response under RCW 38.52.430, and may require bonds for the faithful observance of any and all conditions imposed in the probation.
(3) The superior court shall order restitution in all cases where the victim is entitled to benefits under the crime victims' compensation act, chapter 7.68 RCW. If the superior court does not order restitution and the victim of the crime has been determined to be entitled to benefits under the crime victims' compensation act, the department of labor and industries, as administrator of the crime victims' compensation program, may petition the superior court within one year of imposition of the sentence for entry of a restitution order. Upon receipt of a petition from the department of labor and industries, the superior court shall hold a restitution hearing and shall enter a restitution order.
(4) At any time, including at sentencing, the court may determine that the offender is not required to pay, or may relieve the offender of the requirement to pay, full or partial restitution and accrued interest on restitution where the entity to whom restitution is owed is an insurer or a state agency, except for restitution owed to the department of labor and industries under chapter 7.68 RCW, if the court finds that the offender does not have the current or likely future ability to pay. A person does not have the current ability to pay if the person is indigent as defined in RCW 10.01.160(3). For the purposes of this subsection, the terms "insurer" and "state agency" have the same meanings as provided in RCW 9.94A.750(3).
(5) In granting probation, the superior court may order the probationer to report to the secretary of corrections or such officer as the secretary may designate and as a condition of the probation to follow the instructions of the secretary for up to twelve months. If the county legislative authority has elected to assume responsibility for the supervision of superior court misdemeanant probationers within its jurisdiction, the superior court misdemeanant probationer shall report to a probation officer employed or contracted for by the county. In cases where a superior court misdemeanant probationer is sentenced in one county, but resides within another county, there must be provisions for the probationer to report to the agency having supervision responsibility for the probationer's county of residence.
(6) If the probationer has been ordered to make restitution and the superior court has ordered supervision, the officer supervising the probationer shall make a reasonable effort to ascertain whether restitution has been made. If the superior court has ordered supervision and restitution has not been made as ordered, the officer shall inform the prosecutor of that violation of the terms of probation not less than three months prior to the termination of the probation period. The secretary of corrections will promulgate rules and regulations for the conduct of the person during the term of probation. For defendants found guilty in district court, like functions as the secretary performs in regard to probation may be performed by probation officers employed for that purpose by the county legislative authority of the county wherein the court is located.
(7) The provisions of RCW 9.94A.501 and * 9.94A.5011 apply to sentences imposed under this section.
(8) For purposes of this section, "domestic violence" means the same as in RCW 10.99.020.
[ 2023 c 449 s 11; 2022 c 260 s 7; 2019 c 263 s 302; 2012 1st sp.s. c 6 s 10; (2012 1st sp.s. c 6 s 9 expired August 1, 2012); 2012 c 183 s 4; 2011 1st sp.s. c 40 s 7; 2005 c 362 s 4; 1996 c 298 s 3; 1995 1st sp.s. c 19 s 29; 1995 c 33 s 6; 1993 c 251 s 3; 1992 c 86 s 1; 1987 c 202 s 146; 1984 c 46 s 1; 1983 c 156 s 4; 1982 1st ex.s. c 47 s 10; 1982 1st ex.s. c 8 s 5; 1981 c 136 s 42; 1980 c 19 s 1. Prior: 1979 c 141 s 7; 1979 c 29 s 2; 1969 c 29 s 1; 1967 c 200 s 8; 1967 c 134 s 16; 1957 c 227 s 4; prior: 1949 c 77 s 1; 1939 c 125 s 1, part; Rem. Supp. 1949 s 10249-5b.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: RCW 9.94A.5011 expired August 1, 2014.
Effective date—2023 c 449: See note following RCW 13.40.058.
Construction—Effective date—2022 c 260: See notes following RCW 3.66.120.
Findings—Intent—2019 c 263 ss 202-803: See note following RCW 10.01.240.
Findings—Intent—Domestic violence no-contact orders—2019 c 263 ss 302 and 303: See note following RCW 10.99.050.
Effective date—2012 1st sp.s. c 6 s 10: "Section 10 of this act takes effect August 1, 2012." [ 2012 1st sp.s. c 6 s 17.]
Expiration date—2012 1st sp.s. c 6 s 9: "Section 9 of this act expires August 1, 2012." [ 2012 1st sp.s. c 6 s 16.]
Application—2012 1st sp.s. c 6: See note following RCW 9.94A.631.
Effective date—2012 c 183: See note following RCW 9.94A.475.
Application—Recalculation of community custody terms—2011 1st sp.s. c 40: See note following RCW 9.94A.501.
Effective date—2011 1st sp.s. c 40 ss 1-9, 42: See note following RCW 9.94A.501.
Effective date—2005 c 362: See note following RCW 9.94A.501.
Findings—Purpose—Short title—Severability—Effective date—1995 1st sp.s. c 19: See notes following RCW 72.09.450.
Finding—Intent—1993 c 251: See note following RCW 38.52.430.
Intent—1987 c 202: See note following RCW 2.04.190.
Severability—1982 1st ex.s. c 47: See note following RCW 9.41.190.
Intent—Reports—1982 1st ex.s. c 8: See note following RCW 7.68.035.
Effective date—1981 c 136: See RCW 72.09.900.
Severability—1939 c 125: See note following RCW 9.95.200.
Restitution
alternative to fine: RCW 9A.20.030.
condition to suspending sentence: RCW 9.92.060.
disposition when victim not found or dead: RCW 7.68.290.
Termination of suspended sentence, restoration of civil rights: RCW 9.92.066.
Violations of probation conditions, rearrest, detention: RCW 72.04A.090.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 137 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1953–2025 · leading case: State v. Rice, 320 P.3d 723 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rice, 320 P.3d 723 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 23× “3d 358 (2011) (quoting RCW 9.95.210(1)). ¶16 In Parent , Kerry Parent pleaded guilty to two counts of misdemeanor assault.”
City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 24× “060 and RCW 9.95.210, adding language that the defendant, Donald Fuller, contends divested municipal courts of this authority, except in limited circumstances.”
State v. Hall, 666 P.2d 930 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 16× “The State makes several fundamental arguments. Its first contention is that the trial court acted without authority in entering an order deferring imposition of sentence without requiring the defendant to report to the secretary of corrections *305 for probation supervision as…”
State v. Mark, 675 P.2d 1250 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 8× “Propriety of Restitution Former RCW 9.95.210, as it read at the pertinent time, authorized the court to impose restitution as a condition of probation "as it deems appropriate under the circumstances .”
State v. Barr, 658 P.2d 1247 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 8× “Division Two of the Court of Appeals certified the appeal to this court on the following issue: Whether a person convicted of negligent homicide may, as a condition of probation under RCW 9.95.210, be required to pay restitution to the spouse and minor child of the victim.”
State v. Mortrud, 575 P.2d 227 (Wash. 1978). · cites it 8× “Execution of the sentence was deferred pursuant to RCW 9.95.210, and defendant was placed on probation for a period of 1 year upon two conditions: (1) Full compliance with the rules of probation, and (2) payment within 6 months of restitution in the amount of $400 and costs and…”
State v. Hultman, 600 P.2d 1291 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 8× “RCW 9.95.210. RCW 9.95.230 grants the court authority to revoke its order of suspension.”
State v. Monday, 540 P.2d 416 (Wash. 1975). · cites it 12× “064, which has been termed the suspended sentence act; and (2) RCW 9.95.210, which has been termed the probation act: See State v.”
State v. Thomas, 138 Wash. App. 78 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 6× “RCW 9.95.210 relates to the granting of probation for non-SRA (Sentencing Reform Act, chapter 9.”
State v. Thomas, 155 P.3d 998 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 5× “[2] RCW 9.95.210 relates to the granting of probation for non-SRA sentences and subsection (2), in relevant part, provides the court imposing probation power to order the defendant "to make restitution to any person or persons who may have suffered loss or damage by reason of…”
State v. Gailus, 147 P.3d 1300 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “¶ 19 The superior court's authority to suspend or defer a sentence is codified in RCW 9.95.210, which states: In granting probation, the superior court may suspend the imposition or the execution of the sentence and may direct that the suspension may continue upon such…”
City of Spokane v. Marquette, 43 P.3d 502 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “230 apply to the superior courts, and give them the power to grant probation for the longer of two years or the statutory maximum sentence for the defendant's crime, as well as the power to modify or revoke probation. RCW 35.”
Show all 137 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(1) — 14 cases
Couch v. Dep't of Corr., 54 P.3d 197 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
Couch v. Wa. Dep't of Corr., 54 P.3d 197 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
City of Spokane v. Marquette, 43 P.3d 502 (Wash. 2002). “230 apply to the superior courts, and give them the power to grant probation for the longer of two years or the statutory maximum sentence for the defendant's crime, as well as the power to modify or revoke probation. RCW 35.”
City of Spokane v. Marquette, 146 Wash. 2d 124 (Wash. 2002).
State v. Gailus, 136 Wash. App. 191 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(1)(a) — 13 cases
State v. Rodriguez, 335 P.3d 448 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
State Of Washington v. Mustafa Mohamud Arteh (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State Of Washington v. Zackary Allen Brame (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
State Of Washington v. Valentin Delgado (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State of Washington v. Fernando Francisco (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(1)(b) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Gordon Lee McVay (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(2) — 25 cases
City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013). “060 and RCW 9.95.210, adding language that the defendant, Donald Fuller, contends divested municipal courts of this authority, except in limited circumstances.”
State v. Rice, 320 P.3d 723 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “3d 358 (2011) (quoting RCW 9.95.210(1)). ¶16 In Parent , Kerry Parent pleaded guilty to two counts of misdemeanor assault.”
State v. Thomas, 138 Wash. App. 78 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “RCW 9.95.210 relates to the granting of probation for non-SRA (Sentencing Reform Act, chapter 9.”
State v. Barr, 658 P.2d 1247 (Wash. 1983). “Division Two of the Court of Appeals certified the appeal to this court on the following issue: Whether a person convicted of negligent homicide may, as a condition of probation under RCW 9.95.210, be required to pay restitution to the spouse and minor child of the victim.”
State v. Thomas, 155 P.3d 998 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “[2] RCW 9.95.210 relates to the granting of probation for non-SRA sentences and subsection (2), in relevant part, provides the court imposing probation power to order the defendant "to make restitution to any person or persons who may have suffered loss or damage by reason of…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(2)(b) — 3 cases
State v. Ring, 141 P.3d 669 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006).
State Of Washington v. Reno Duane Doolittle (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
State Of Washington, V. Carl Harris (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(3) — 3 cases
Clark v. Baines, 55 P.3d 1180 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
State Of Washington v. Reno Duane Doolittle (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
Clark v. Baines, 55 P.3d 1180 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(4) — 5 cases
State v. Morgan, 562 P.3d 360 (Wash. 2025).
State v. Monson, 929 P.2d 1186 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Monson, 929 P.2d 1186 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Robert Rachels, App. (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
State Of Washington, V. Pereace E. Horton (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(5) — 1 case
State Of Washington, Resp. v. Robert Rachels, App. (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.95.210(l)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Rice, 320 P.3d 723 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “3d 358 (2011) (quoting RCW 9.95.210(1)). ¶16 In Parent , Kerry Parent pleaded guilty to two counts of misdemeanor assault.”
State v. Slattum, 295 P.3d 788 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).
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.