Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.36
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045 (2026)

Drive-by shooting

✓ 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 person is guilty of drive-by shooting when he or she recklessly discharges a firearm as defined in RCW 9.41.010 in a manner which creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person and the discharge is either from a motor vehicle or from the immediate area of a motor vehicle that was used to transport the shooter or the firearm, or both, to the scene of the discharge.
(2) A person who unlawfully discharges a firearm from a moving motor vehicle may be inferred to have engaged in reckless conduct, unless the discharge is shown by evidence satisfactory to the trier of fact to have been made without such recklessness.
(3) Drive-by shooting is a class B felony.
[ 1997 c 338 s 44; 1995 c 129 s 8 (Initiative Measure No. 159); (1994 sp.s. c 7 s 511 repealed by 1995 c 129 s 19 (Initiative Measure No. 159)); 1989 c 271 s 109.]

Notes:

Finding—Evaluation—Report—1997 c 338: See note following RCW 13.40.0357.
Severability—Effective dates—1997 c 338: See notes following RCW 5.60.060.
Findings and intent—Short title—Severability—Captions not law—1995 c 129: See notes following RCW 9.94A.510.
Finding—Intent—Severability—Effective dates—Contingent expiration date—1994 sp.s. c 7: See notes following RCW 43.70.540.
Finding—Intent—1989 c 271 ss 102, 109, and 110: See note following RCW 9A.36.050.
Application—1989 c 271 ss 101-111: See note following RCW 9.94A.510.
Severability—1989 c 271: See note following RCW 9.94A.510.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 77 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: State v. Locklear, 105 Wash. App. 555 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Locklear, 105 Wash. App. 555 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 14× “He was convicted under RCW 9A.36.045, the drive-by shooting statute, which required that he fire the gun “either from a motor vehicle or from the immediate area of a motor vehicle that was used to transport [him] or the firearm, or both, to the scene of the discharge.”
State v. Locklear, 20 P.3d 993 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 14× “045, the drive-by shooting statute, which required that he fire the gun "either from a motor vehicle or from the immediate area of a motor vehicle that was used to transport [him] or the firearm, or both, to the scene of the discharge.”
United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). “Laws § 11-47-61 (2002) ("substantial risk of death or serious injury"); Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045(1) (2018) ("substantial risk of death or serious physical injury"); W.”
State v. Rodgers, 43 P.3d 1 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “At the conclusion of a bench trial in Pierce County Superior Court, the trial judge found codefendants Eddie James Locklear and Jesse Lee Rodgers each guilty of violating RCW 9A.36.045, the crime of drive by shooting.”
State v. Rodgers, 146 Wash. 2d 55 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “— At the conclusion of a bench trial in Pierce County Superior Court, the trial judge found codefendants Eddie James Locklear and Jesse Lee Rodgers each guilty of violating RCW 9A.36.045, the crime of drive-by shooting.”
State v. Ferreira, 850 P.2d 541 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 3× “Ferreira's contentions that (a) reckless endangerment, RCW 9A.36.045, 4 is a lesser included offense of first degree assault and (b) the evidence only proved reckless endangerment by the shooters.”
State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “RCW 9A.36.045( 1). Convenience store owner Surjit Singh was asked ifhe saw where Mr.”
Bowman v. State, 172 P.3d 681 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 2× “[2] As defined in RCW 9A.36.045, drive-by shooting merely requires an individual to "recklessly discharge[] a firearm" from a vehicle.”
State v. Elmi, 166 Wash. 2d 209 (Wash. 2009). “RCW 9A.36.045(1), .050; compare 11 Washington Practice: Washington Pattern Jury Instructions: Criminal 35.”
State v. Elmi, 207 P.3d 439 (Wash. 2009). “RCW 9A.36.045(1), .050; compare *449 11 Washington Practice: Washington Pattern Jury Instructions: Criminal 35.”
State v. Johnson, 180 Wash. 2d 295 (Wash. 2014). “See RCW 9A.36.045, .021, .050. Under the reasoning of the Court of Appeals, separate definitions of “reckless” would be needed for each crime, causing confusion and adding unnecessary repetition to the jury instructions.”
State v. Spencer, 45 P.3d 209 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “The State charged Spencer with one count of drive-by shooting in violation of RCW 9A.36.045(1) [1] and one count of witness tampering in violation of RCW 9A.”
Show all 77 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045(1) — 54 cases
United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). “Laws § 11-47-61 (2002) ("substantial risk of death or serious injury"); Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045(1) (2018) ("substantial risk of death or serious physical injury"); W.”
State v. Elmi, 166 Wash. 2d 209 (Wash. 2009). “RCW 9A.36.045(1), .050; compare 11 Washington Practice: Washington Pattern Jury Instructions: Criminal 35.”
State v. Elmi, 207 P.3d 439 (Wash. 2009). “RCW 9A.36.045(1), .050; compare *449 11 Washington Practice: Washington Pattern Jury Instructions: Criminal 35.”
State v. Locklear, 105 Wash. App. 555 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “He was convicted under RCW 9A.36.045, the drive-by shooting statute, which required that he fire the gun “either from a motor vehicle or from the immediate area of a motor vehicle that was used to transport [him] or the firearm, or both, to the scene of the discharge.”
State v. Locklear, 20 P.3d 993 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “045, the drive-by shooting statute, which required that he fire the gun "either from a motor vehicle or from the immediate area of a motor vehicle that was used to transport [him] or the firearm, or both, to the scene of the discharge.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045(2) — 10 cases
State v. Locklear, 105 Wash. App. 555 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “He was convicted under RCW 9A.36.045, the drive-by shooting statute, which required that he fire the gun “either from a motor vehicle or from the immediate area of a motor vehicle that was used to transport [him] or the firearm, or both, to the scene of the discharge.”
State v. Rivera, 932 P.2d 701 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Washington, 822 P.2d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Washington, 822 P.2d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992).
State Of Washington v. Justin P. Davis (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045(3) — 2 cases
State Of Washington, V Sopheap Chith (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
State Of Washington, V. Richard N. Phillips (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.36.045(l) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Ricardo Juarez Deleon (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
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.