Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.16
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;
(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;
(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;
(4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;
(5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;
(6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.
[ 1986 c 149 s 2; 1979 ex.s. c 244 s 7; 1977 ex.s. c 80 s 13; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 s 9A.16.020.]

Notes:

Effective date—1979 ex.s. c 244: See RCW 9A.44.902.
Purpose—Intent—Severability—1977 ex.s. c 80: See notes following RCW 4.16.190.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 167 cases (35 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: State v. Kyllo, 215 P.3d 177 (Wash. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Kyllo, 215 P.3d 177 (Wash. 2009). · cites it 5× “correctly observed, in substituting the language from Miller, the Committee on Instructions departed from the law of self-defense stated in RCW 9A.16.020. ¶ 22 In L.B., the Court of Appeals held that giving an "act on appearances" instruction based on the apprehension of "great…”
State v. Brightman, 122 P.3d 150 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 5× “In addition, RCW 9A.16.020, Washington's general self-defense statute, explains: The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases: .”
State v. McCullum, 656 P.2d 1064 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 6× “32.050; RCW 9A.32.060; RCW 9A.32.070. The Legislature also placed the homicide justification of self-defense under the provisions of RCW 9A.”
State v. Yelovich, 426 P.3d 723 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 19× “YU, J ¶ 1 Petitioner Steven Yelovich asks this court to consider whether an individual defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on defense of property pursuant to RCW 9A.16.020 as an affirmative defense to assault.”
State v. Acosta, 683 P.2d 1069 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 4× “See RCW 9A.16.020(3). It is therefore impossible for one who acts in self-defense to be aware of facts or circumstances "described by a statute defining an offense".”
State v. Mierz, 901 P.2d 286 (Wash. 1995). · cites it 3× “RCW 9A.16.020(3). Nor did the court bar Mierz from offering proof as to defense of property.”
State v. Jarvis, 246 P.3d 1280 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 7× “RCW 9A.16.020 defines the lawful use of force in Washington.”
State v. Box, 745 P.2d 23 (Wash. 1987). · cites it 4× “RCW 9A.16.020(3). This ignores the fact that the element of intent might be absent, and the act lawful, for a different reason.”
State v. Hughes, 721 P.2d 902 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 2× “50 RCW 9A.16.020(1). 51 Theroff , at 389. 52 See Theroff, at 389; State v.”
State v. Valentine, 935 P.2d 1294 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 3× “RCW 9A.16.020(3) . . . .” Mierz, 127 Wn.2d at 476 .”
State v. Woods, 156 P.3d 309 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “¶ 20 RCW 9A.16.020(3) sets out the parameters of self-defense in Washington.”
Brooks v. City of Seattle, 599 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “See Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(1) (finding force used by a police officer not unlawful “[w]henever necessarily used .”
Show all 167 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(1) — 10 cases
Brooks v. City of Seattle, 599 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2010). “See Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(1) (finding force used by a police officer not unlawful “[w]henever necessarily used .”
State v. Smith, 759 P.2d 372 (Wash. 1988).
State v. Hughes, 721 P.2d 902 (Wash. 1986). “50 RCW 9A.16.020(1). 51 Theroff , at 389. 52 See Theroff, at 389; State v.”
State v. Johnson, 631 P.2d 413 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981).
State v. Hendrickson, 989 P.2d 1210 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(2) — 3 cases
State v. Miller, 698 P.2d 554 (Wash. 1985).
Strange v. Spokane Cnty., 287 P.3d 710 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
State of Washington v. Todd James Wixon (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(3) — 108 cases
State v. McCullum, 656 P.2d 1064 (Wash. 1983). “32.050; RCW 9A.32.060; RCW 9A.32.070. The Legislature also placed the homicide justification of self-defense under the provisions of RCW 9A.”
State v. Kyllo, 215 P.3d 177 (Wash. 2009). “correctly observed, in substituting the language from Miller, the Committee on Instructions departed from the law of self-defense stated in RCW 9A.16.020. ¶ 22 In L.B., the Court of Appeals held that giving an "act on appearances" instruction based on the apprehension of "great…”
State v. Acosta, 683 P.2d 1069 (Wash. 1984). “See RCW 9A.16.020(3). It is therefore impossible for one who acts in self-defense to be aware of facts or circumstances "described by a statute defining an offense".”
State v. Brightman, 122 P.3d 150 (Wash. 2005). “In addition, RCW 9A.16.020, Washington's general self-defense statute, explains: The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases: .”
State v. Mierz, 901 P.2d 286 (Wash. 1995). “RCW 9A.16.020(3). Nor did the court bar Mierz from offering proof as to defense of property.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(5) — 2 cases
State v. Bennett, 708 P.2d 1232 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985).
State v. Singleton, 705 P.2d 825 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.16.020(6) — 3 cases
State v. Jarvis, 246 P.3d 1280 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “RCW 9A.16.020 defines the lawful use of force in Washington.”
State v. Jarvis, 160 Wash. App. 111 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
State Of Washington, V. A.T (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
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.