Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.44
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030 (2026)

Defenses to prosecution under this chapter

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) In any prosecution under this chapter in which lack of consent is based solely upon the victim's mental incapacity or upon the victim's being physically helpless, it is a defense which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the offense the defendant reasonably believed that the victim was not mentally incapacitated and/or physically helpless.
(2) In any prosecution under this chapter in which the offense or degree of the offense depends on the victim's age, it is no defense that the perpetrator did not know the victim's age, or that the perpetrator believed the victim to be older, as the case may be: PROVIDED, That it is a defense which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the offense the defendant reasonably believed the alleged victim to be the age identified in subsection (3) of this section based upon declarations as to age by the alleged victim.
(3) The defense afforded by subsection (2) of this section requires that for the following defendants, the reasonable belief be as indicated:
(a) For a defendant charged with rape of a child in the first degree, that the victim was at least twelve, or was less than twenty-four months younger than the defendant;
(b) For a defendant charged with rape of a child in the second degree, that the victim was at least fourteen, or was less than thirty-six months younger than the defendant;
(c) For a defendant charged with rape of a child in the third degree, that the victim was at least sixteen, or was less than forty-eight months younger than the defendant;
(d) For a defendant charged with sexual misconduct with a minor in the first degree, that the victim was at least eighteen, or was less than sixty months younger than the defendant;
(e) For a defendant charged with child molestation in the first degree, that the victim was at least twelve, or was less than thirty-six months younger than the defendant;
(f) For a defendant charged with child molestation in the second degree, that the victim was at least fourteen, or was less than thirty-six months younger than the defendant;
(g) For a defendant charged with child molestation in the third degree, that the victim was at least sixteen, or was less than thirty-six months younger than the defendant;
(h) For a defendant charged with sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree, that the victim was at least eighteen, or was less than sixty months younger than the defendant.
[ 1988 c 145 s 20; 1975 1st ex.s. c 14 s 3. Formerly RCW 9.79.160.]

Notes:

Effective date—Savings—Application—1988 c 145: See notes following RCW 9A.44.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: State v. Hirschfelder, 170 Wash. 2d 536 (Wash. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hirschfelder, 170 Wash. 2d 536 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 16× “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wn.2d at 146 .”
State v. Hirschfelder, 242 P.3d 876 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 18× “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wash.2d at 146 , 18 P.”
State v. Powell, 150 Wash. App. 139 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “He argues that he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, who failed to propose a jury instruction on the “reasonable belief” defense, RCW 9A.44.030(1). 1 Following In re Personal Restraint of Hubert, 138 Wn.”
State v. Powell, 206 P.3d 703 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “He argues that he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, who failed to propose a jury instruction on the "reasonable belief" defense, RCW 9A.44.030(1). [1] Following In re Personal Restraint of Hubert, 138 Wash.”
State v. Lynch, 309 P.3d 482 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 4× “RCW 9A.44.030, which is titled “[d]efenses to prosecution under this chapter,” codifies several “reasonable belief” defenses to prosecutions in which “lack of consent is based solely upon the victim’s mental incapacity or .”
State v. Blake, 481 P.3d 521 (Wash. 2021). “THE STATE RETAINS THE POWER TO ENACT STRICT LIABILITY CRIMES, BUT THE SIMPLE POSSESSION STATUTE IS UNIQUE IN OUR STATE IN PUNISHING WHOLLY INNOCENT NONCONDUCT The State compares the drug possession statute to other crimes and claims that declaring it unconstitutional will…”
State v. Patel, 170 Wash. 2d 476 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 13× “While intent with regard to the age of the victim is not an element of the crime, a defendant’s knowledge of the victim’s age is relevant in that defendants may assert an affirmative defense and prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they reasonably believed the victim…”
State v. Mohamed, 301 P.3d 504 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “RCW 9A.44.030 sets out the defenses to the prosecution of sex offenses under the chapter.”
State v. McCullum, 656 P.2d 1064 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 2× “030 (kidnapping); RCW 9A.44.030 (sexual offenses); RCW 9A.48.”
State v. Acosta, 683 P.2d 1069 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 2× “030 (kidnapping); RCW 9A.44.030 (sexual offenses); RCW 9A.48.”
State v. Lough, 853 P.2d 920 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “It is also apparent from RCW 9A.44.030(1) which allows a defendant to negate culpability by interposing the affirmative defense that he reasonably believed the victim was not physically helpless.”
State v. Johnson, 270 P.3d 591 (Wash. 2012). · cites it 2× “Compare RCW 9A.44.030(2), with RCW 9.68A.110(3). However, Johnson was charged with attempted promotion of commercial sexual abuse of a minor.”
Show all 78 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030(1) — 35 cases
State v. Powell, 150 Wash. App. 139 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “He argues that he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, who failed to propose a jury instruction on the “reasonable belief” defense, RCW 9A.44.030(1). 1 Following In re Personal Restraint of Hubert, 138 Wn.”
State v. Powell, 206 P.3d 703 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “He argues that he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, who failed to propose a jury instruction on the "reasonable belief" defense, RCW 9A.44.030(1). [1] Following In re Personal Restraint of Hubert, 138 Wash.”
State v. Lough, 853 P.2d 920 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). “It is also apparent from RCW 9A.44.030(1) which allows a defendant to negate culpability by interposing the affirmative defense that he reasonably believed the victim was not physically helpless.”
State v. Lynch, 309 P.3d 482 (Wash. 2013). “RCW 9A.44.030, which is titled “[d]efenses to prosecution under this chapter,” codifies several “reasonable belief” defenses to prosecutions in which “lack of consent is based solely upon the victim’s mental incapacity or .”
State v. Weaville, 256 P.3d 426 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030(2) — 33 cases
State v. Patel, 170 Wash. 2d 476 (Wash. 2010). “While intent with regard to the age of the victim is not an element of the crime, a defendant’s knowledge of the victim’s age is relevant in that defendants may assert an affirmative defense and prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they reasonably believed the victim…”
State v. Johnson, 270 P.3d 591 (Wash. 2012). “Compare RCW 9A.44.030(2), with RCW 9.68A.110(3). However, Johnson was charged with attempted promotion of commercial sexual abuse of a minor.”
State v. O'Dell, 358 P.3d 359 (Wash. 2015).
State v. Burke, 181 P.3d 1 (Wash. 2008).
State v. Hirschfelder, 170 Wash. 2d 536 (Wash. 2010). “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wn.2d at 146 .”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030(3) — 3 cases
State v. Hirschfelder, 170 Wash. 2d 536 (Wash. 2010). “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wn.2d at 146 .”
State v. Hirschfelder, 242 P.3d 876 (Wash. 2010). “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wash.2d at 146 , 18 P.”
State v. Hernandez, 770 P.2d 642 (Wash. Ct. App. 1989).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030(3)(b) — 1 case
State Of Washington, V. Aeurlious E. Drayton (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030(3)(c) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Michael Brian Broussard (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.030(3)(d) — 2 cases
State v. Hirschfelder, 170 Wash. 2d 536 (Wash. 2010). “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wn.2d at 146 .”
State v. Hirschfelder, 242 P.3d 876 (Wash. 2010). “It is also the more recent statute as compared to RCW 9A.44.030. Hallauer, 143 Wash.2d at 146 , 18 P.”
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.