Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.48.070 (2026)
Malicious mischief in the first degree
✓ 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 malicious mischief in the first degree if he or she knowingly and maliciously:
(a) Causes physical damage to the property of another in an amount exceeding five thousand dollars;
(b) Causes an interruption or impairment of service rendered to the public by physically damaging or tampering with an emergency vehicle or property of the state, a political subdivision thereof, or a public utility or mode of public transportation, power, or communication;
(c) Causes an impairment of the safety, efficiency, or operation of an aircraft by physically damaging or tampering with the aircraft or aircraft equipment, fuel, lubricant, or parts; or
(d) Causes an interruption or impairment of service rendered to the public by, without lawful authority, physically damaging, destroying, or removing an official ballot deposit box or ballot drop box or, without lawful authority, damaging, destroying, removing, or tampering with the contents thereof.
(2) Malicious mischief in the first degree is a class B felony.
Notes:
Applicability—2009 c 431: See note following RCW 4.24.230.
Severability—1983 1st ex.s. c 4: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 1983 1st ex.s. c 4 s 6.]
Property crime database, liability: RCW 4.24.340.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: State v. Wooten, 312 P.3d 41 (Wash. 2013).
State v. Wooten, 312 P.3d 41 (Wash. 2013). “Former RCW 9A.48.070 (1983). 2 “Malice” is defined as “an evil intent, wish, or design to vex, annoy, or injure another person.”
City of Seattle v. Fontanilla, 909 P.2d 1294 (Wash. 1996). “We are satisfied that the Legislature knows the difference between the City and the State.”
State v. Pascal, 736 P.2d 1065 (Wash. 1987). “030); first degree malicious mischief (RCW 9A.48.070); first degree possession of stolen property (RCW 9A.”
State v. Abdi-Issa, 504 P.3d 223 (Wash. 2022). “080); (xii) Malicious mischief in the first degree (RCW 9A.48.070); (xiii) Malicious mischief in the second degree (RCW 9A.”
State v. Snapp, 82 P.3d 252 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “080); ( l ) Malicious mischief in the first degree (RCW 9A.48.070); (m) Malicious mischief in the second degree (RCW 9A.”
State v. Arth, 87 P.3d 1206 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Under RCW 9A.48.070(1)(a), "a person is guilty of malicious mischief in the first degree if he knowingly and maliciously .”
Bowers v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 991 P.2d 734 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “” RCW 9A.48.070, .080, .090. Farmers argues that the tenants’ conduct was not *46 vandalism or malicious mischief because the conduct was not malicious.”
State v. Newcomb, 160 Wash. App. 184 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “Former RCW 9A.48.070(l)(a) (1983). “Property of another” is property in which the defendant possesses anything less than exclusive ownership.”
State v. Arth, 121 Wash. App. 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Under RCW 9A.48.070(l)(a), “a person is guilty of malicious mischief in the first degree if he knowingly and maliciously .”
Bowers v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 991 P.2d 734 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “" RCW 9A.48.070, .080, .090. Farmers argues that the tenants' conduct was not vandalism or malicious mischief because the conduct was not malicious.”
State v. Linares, 880 P.2d 550 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). “Pam was charged with, and ultimately found guilty of, malicious mischief in the first degree, in violation of RCW 9A.48.070(l)(a). Discussion Because both Linares and Pam were under the age of 12 at the time of the incidents, the trial court held capacity hearings pursuant to…”
Coffel v. Clallam Cnty., 794 P.2d 513 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990). “The *524 transgressions of Caldwell and others could be characterized as any of several criminal violations: malicious mischief, RCW 9A.48.070; criminal trespass, RCW 9A.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.48.070(1)(a) — 10 cases
State v. Arth, 87 P.3d 1206 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Under RCW 9A.48.070(1)(a), "a person is guilty of malicious mischief in the first degree if he knowingly and maliciously .”
State v. Newcomb, 246 P.3d 1286 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
State v. Olson, 633 P.2d 927 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981).
State v. Long, 991 P.2d 102 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000).
State Of Washington v. Robert Ford (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.48.070(1)(b) — 2 cases
State of Washington v. Patrick Joseph Lennartz (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
State Of Washington v. Christopher Michael Ervin (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.48.070(l)(a) — 7 cases
State v. Wooten, 312 P.3d 41 (Wash. 2013). “Former RCW 9A.48.070 (1983). 2 “Malice” is defined as “an evil intent, wish, or design to vex, annoy, or injure another person.”
State v. Newcomb, 160 Wash. App. 184 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “Former RCW 9A.48.070(l)(a) (1983). “Property of another” is property in which the defendant possesses anything less than exclusive ownership.”
State v. Arth, 121 Wash. App. 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Under RCW 9A.48.070(l)(a), “a person is guilty of malicious mischief in the first degree if he knowingly and maliciously .”
State v. Linares, 880 P.2d 550 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). “Pam was charged with, and ultimately found guilty of, malicious mischief in the first degree, in violation of RCW 9A.48.070(l)(a). Discussion Because both Linares and Pam were under the age of 12 at the time of the incidents, the trial court held capacity hearings pursuant to…”
State v. Olson, 633 P.2d 927 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.48.070(l)(b) — 1 case
Post Sentence Petition Of Anthony Lucio (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
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.