Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120 (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) A statement not otherwise admissible by statute or court rule, is admissible in evidence in dependency proceedings under Title 13 RCW and criminal proceedings, including juvenile offense adjudications, in the courts of the state of Washington if:
(a)(i) It is made by a child when under the age of ten describing any act of sexual contact performed with or on the child by another, describing any attempted act of sexual contact with or on the child by another, or describing any act of physical abuse of the child by another that results in substantial bodily harm as defined by RCW 9A.04.110; or
(ii) It is made by a child when under the age of 18 describing any of the following acts or attempted acts performed with or on the child: Trafficking under RCW 9A.40.100; commercial sexual abuse of a minor under RCW 9.68A.100; promoting commercial sexual abuse of a minor under RCW 9.68A.101; or promoting travel for commercial sexual abuse of a minor under RCW 9.68A.102;
(b) The court finds, in a hearing conducted outside the presence of the jury, that the time, content, and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient indicia of reliability; and
(c) The child either:
(i) Testifies at the proceedings; or
(ii) Is unavailable as a witness, except that when the child is unavailable as a witness, such statement may be admitted only if there is corroborative evidence of the act.
(2) A statement may not be admitted under this section unless the proponent of the statement makes known to the adverse party his or her intention to offer the statement and the particulars of the statement sufficiently in advance of the proceedings to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to prepare to meet the statement.
Notes:
Effective date—2024 c 298: See note following RCW 9A.40.100.
Severability—1982 c 129: See note following RCW 9A.04.080.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 257
cases (26 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: State v. C.J., 63 P.3d 765 (Wash. 2003).
State v. C.J., 63 P.3d 765 (Wash. 2003). “There is a distinction between unavailability as a witness at trial and the requirements of RCW 9A.44.120 for admission of a child’s out-of-court statement.”
State v. Ryan, 691 P.2d 197 (Wash. 1984). “Defendant (appellant) John Ryan was convicted in Okanogan County of two counts of indecent liberties in a trial where hearsay statements of the two alleged victims were admitted under this statutory exception to the hearsay rule. Division Three of the Court of Appeals certified…”
State v. Swan, 790 P.2d 610 (Wash. 1990). “Before trial, the State gave notice of its intent to rely upon the child sexual abuse hearsay exception set forth in RCW 9A.44.120, Washington's child victim hearsay statute.”
State v. Smith, 59 P.3d 74 (Wash. 2002). “, was unavailable to testify for the purpose of allowing hearsay under RCW 9A.44.120 without first requiring the State to show that J.”
State v. Smith, 148 Wash. 2d 122 (Wash. 2002). “pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120., The court held a hearing to determine J.”
In Re Pers. Restraint of Grasso, 84 P.3d 859 (Wash. 2004). “Before trial, the court conducted a child hearsay hearing pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120, under which a statement made by a child when under the age of 10, describing any act of sexual contact performed on the child by another, is admissible if the court finds (1) sufficient indicia…”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Grasso, 151 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2004). “Before trial, the court conducted a child hearsay hearing pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120, under which a statement made by a child when under the age of 10, describing any act of sexual contact performed on the child by another, is admissible if the court finds (1) sufficient indicia…”
State v. Shafer, 128 P.3d 87 (Wash. 2006). “At trial, certain statements that the alleged child victim made to her mother and another person were admitted pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120, notwithstanding the fact that the victim did not testify at the trial and Shafer had no prior opportunity to cross-examine the child.”
State v. Shafer, 156 Wash. 2d 381 (Wash. 2006). “At trial, certain statements that the alleged child victim made to her mother and another person were admitted pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120, notwithstanding the fact that the victim did not testify at the trial and Shafer had no prior opportunity to cross-examine the child.”
State v. Brousseau, 259 P.3d 209 (Wash. 2011). “, was competent to testify and *211 whether her out-of-court statements were admissible under Washington's child hearsay exception, RCW 9A.44.120. The court heard testimony from Brousseau's witness, Dr.”
State v. John Doe, 719 P.2d 554 (Wash. 1986). “The prosecutor argued that the statement was admissible either pursuant to the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule or under RCW 9A.44.120 as statements of a child victim to sexual abuse.”
State v. Beadle, 265 P.3d 863 (Wash. 2011). “The court found the child unavailable to testify at trial and admitted her out-of-court disclosures to family members, mental health providers, a child protective services worker, and a law enforcement officer, pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120. *101 ¶2 Beadle appealed, arguing that the…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(1) — 48 cases
State v. C.J., 63 P.3d 765 (Wash. 2003). “There is a distinction between unavailability as a witness at trial and the requirements of RCW 9A.44.120 for admission of a child’s out-of-court statement.”
State v. Ryan, 691 P.2d 197 (Wash. 1984). “Defendant (appellant) John Ryan was convicted in Okanogan County of two counts of indecent liberties in a trial where hearsay statements of the two alleged victims were admitted under this statutory exception to the hearsay rule. Division Three of the Court of Appeals certified…”
State v. John Doe, 719 P.2d 554 (Wash. 1986). “The prosecutor argued that the statement was admissible either pursuant to the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule or under RCW 9A.44.120 as statements of a child victim to sexual abuse.”
Matter of Dependency of AEP, 956 P.2d 297 (Wash. 1998).
In re Dependency of A.E.P., 135 Wash. 2d 208 (Wash. 1998).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(1)(a)(i) — 12 cases
State of Washington v. Mnason Justin Rancourt (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
State Of Washington v. M.d. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
State Of Washington, Respondentv. Kyla M. Till (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
State Of Washington, V. Freddy Escobar (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).
State of Washington v. Travis Michael Carney (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(1)(b) — 9 cases
State Of Washington, Respondentv. Kyla M. Till (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
State Of Washington, V. Freddy Escobar (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).
State of Washington v. Travis Michael Carney (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
State Of Washington V. Robert Alexander Clark (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
State Of Washington, V. Harun H Sheikh (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(1)(c)(i) — 1 case
State Of Washington, V. Donald Henry Moulton (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(1)(c)(ii) — 1 case
State Of Washington V. Robert Alexander Clark (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(1)(c)(iii) — 1 case
State Of Washington, V. Lorenzo Reyes Armenta (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(2) — 12 cases
State v. C.J., 63 P.3d 765 (Wash. 2003). “There is a distinction between unavailability as a witness at trial and the requirements of RCW 9A.44.120 for admission of a child’s out-of-court statement.”
State v. Borland, 786 P.2d 810 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Rohrich, 939 P.2d 697 (Wash. 1997).
State v. Carlson, 812 P.2d 536 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991).
In re Dependency of A.E.P., 135 Wash. 2d 208 (Wash. 1998).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(2)(a) — 15 cases
In re the Pers. Restraint of Grasso, 151 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2004). “Before trial, the court conducted a child hearsay hearing pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120, under which a statement made by a child when under the age of 10, describing any act of sexual contact performed on the child by another, is admissible if the court finds (1) sufficient indicia…”
In Re Pers. Restraint of Grasso, 84 P.3d 859 (Wash. 2004). “Before trial, the court conducted a child hearsay hearing pursuant to RCW 9A.44.120, under which a statement made by a child when under the age of 10, describing any act of sexual contact performed on the child by another, is admissible if the court finds (1) sufficient indicia…”
State v. Rohrich, 939 P.2d 697 (Wash. 1997).
State v. Brousseau, 259 P.3d 209 (Wash. 2011). “, was competent to testify and *211 whether her out-of-court statements were admissible under Washington's child hearsay exception, RCW 9A.44.120. The court heard testimony from Brousseau's witness, Dr.”
State v. Brousseau, 172 Wash. 2d 331 (Wash. 2011).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(2)(b) — 17 cases
State v. C.J., 63 P.3d 765 (Wash. 2003). “There is a distinction between unavailability as a witness at trial and the requirements of RCW 9A.44.120 for admission of a child’s out-of-court statement.”
Matter of Dependency of AEP, 956 P.2d 297 (Wash. 1998).
State v. John Doe, 719 P.2d 554 (Wash. 1986). “The prosecutor argued that the statement was admissible either pursuant to the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule or under RCW 9A.44.120 as statements of a child victim to sexual abuse.”
In re Dependency of A.E.P., 135 Wash. 2d 208 (Wash. 1998).
State v. Frey, 718 P.2d 846 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(b) — 2 cases
State of Washington v. Patrick Jeramy Lyons (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).
Allan R. Teravainen, V. Natalie R. Teravainen, Nka Sullivan (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.44.120(c)(i) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Johnathon James Hancock, 484 P.3d 514 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).
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.