Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.20
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.20.030 (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) If a person has gained money or property or caused a victim to lose money or property through the commission of a crime, upon conviction thereof 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, the court, in lieu of imposing the fine authorized for the offense under RCW 9A.20.020, may order the defendant to pay an amount, fixed by the court, not to exceed double the amount of the defendant's gain or victim's loss from the commission of a crime. Such amount may be used to provide restitution to the victim at the order of the court. It shall be the duty of the prosecuting attorney to investigate the alternative of restitution, and to recommend it to the court, when the prosecuting attorney believes that restitution is appropriate and feasible. If the court orders restitution, the court shall make a finding as to the amount of the defendant's gain or victim's loss from the crime, and if the record does not contain sufficient evidence to support such finding the court may conduct a hearing upon the issue. For purposes of this section, the terms "gain" or "loss" refer to the amount of money or the value of property or services gained or lost.
(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, this section also applies to any corporation or joint stock association found guilty of any crime.
[ 1982 1st ex.s. c 47 s 12; 1979 c 29 s 3; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 s 9A.20.030.]

Notes:

Severability—1982 1st ex.s. c 47: See note following RCW 9.41.190.
Restitution
condition of probation: RCW 9.95.210.
condition to suspending sentence: RCW 9.92.060.
disposition when victim dead or not found: RCW 7.68.290.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2023 · leading case: City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 30× “¶3 Fuller appealed to the King County Superior Court, arguing that the municipal court lacked the authority to order restitution and that restitution may be imposed only in *267 lieu of a fine under RCW 9A.20.030. The superior court rejected this argument, holding that the trial…”
State v. Shannahan, 849 P.2d 1239 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 12× “Reading RCW 9A.20.030 in conjunction with RCW 9A.”
State v. Cameron, 633 P.2d 901 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 3× “RCW 9A.20.030. It may be imposed by the sentencing court on its own motion or on the motion of the prosecutor.”
State v. Romish, 434 P.3d 546 (2019). · cites it 2× “RCW 9A.20.030(1) provides in part: If a person has gained money or property or caused a victim to lose money or property through the commission of a crime, upon conviction thereof .”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Gardner, 617 P.2d 1001 (Wash. 1980). · cites it 3× “The question before us is whether a superior court, pursuant to RCW 9A.20.030, may order restitution in an amount more than double defendant's gain or the victim's loss from the crime for which defendant is convicted on a plea of guilty, where the plea is based upon the…”
State v. Barnett, 675 P.2d 626 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 5× “Under the restitution statute found in former RCW 9A.20.030, the trial court as an alternative to a fine may order a defendant to pay restitution to the victim: (1) If a person has gained money or property or caused a victim to lose money or property through the commission of a…”
State v. Thomas, 138 Wash. App. 78 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “2d 1239 (1993) (applying RCW 9A.20.030). Indeed, “ [restitution is an integral part of the Washington system of criminal justice,” and the various restitution statutes indicate “a strong public policy to provide restitution whenever possible.”
State v. Rogers, 638 P.2d 89 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 3× “Enactment of RCW 9A.20.030(1), although not applied here, indicates the legislature does not contemplate restrictions upon orders of restitution which are inconsistent with such remedial and deterrent objects.”
State v. Deskins, 322 P.3d 780 (Wash. 2014). “200(4), a trial court may impose restitution to repay “reasonable costs incurred pursuant to this chapter by law enforcement agencies, animal care and control agencies, or authorized private or public entities involved with the care of the animals.”
State v. Thomas, 155 P.3d 998 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “210(2) [2] , and RCW 9A.20.030(1). [3] To implement legislative intent, we must interpret these statutes broadly to allow restitution.”
State v. Williams, 937 P.2d 1052 (Wash. 1997). “RCW 9A.20.030. [2] In the final analysis, the principles that the California and Michigan courts recognized in Sims and Watt are applicable here.”
State v. Williams, 132 Wash. 2d 248 (Wash. 1997). “Even if that concern is justified, the State’s forbearance from seeking recoupment via an administrative proceeding is not problematic in cases where criminal charges are laid. That is so because the prosecuting attorney is under a duty to recommend to the court that restitution…”
Show all 36 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.20.030(1) — 21 cases
State v. Romish, 434 P.3d 546 (2019). “RCW 9A.20.030(1) provides in part: If a person has gained money or property or caused a victim to lose money or property through the commission of a crime, upon conviction thereof .”
City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013). “¶3 Fuller appealed to the King County Superior Court, arguing that the municipal court lacked the authority to order restitution and that restitution may be imposed only in *267 lieu of a fine under RCW 9A.20.030. The superior court rejected this argument, holding that the trial…”
State v. Rogers, 638 P.2d 89 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). “Enactment of RCW 9A.20.030(1), although not applied here, indicates the legislature does not contemplate restrictions upon orders of restitution which are inconsistent with such remedial and deterrent objects.”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Gardner, 617 P.2d 1001 (Wash. 1980). “The question before us is whether a superior court, pursuant to RCW 9A.20.030, may order restitution in an amount more than double defendant's gain or the victim's loss from the crime for which defendant is convicted on a plea of guilty, where the plea is based upon the…”
State v. Deskins, 322 P.3d 780 (Wash. 2014). “200(4), a trial court may impose restitution to repay “reasonable costs incurred pursuant to this chapter by law enforcement agencies, animal care and control agencies, or authorized private or public entities involved with the care of the animals.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.20.030(1)(c) — 2 cases
Pers. Restraint Petition Of Peter Anthony Van Auken (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Pers. Restraint Petition Of Stewart Michael Riggs (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).
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.