Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.52
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.52.090 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:
(1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or
(2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or
(3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him or her to enter or remain; or
(4) The actor was attempting to serve legal process which includes any document required or allowed to be served upon persons or property, by any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, or court order, excluding delivery by the mails of the United States. This defense applies only if the actor did not enter into a private residence or other building not open to the public and the entry onto the premises was reasonable and necessary for service of the legal process.
[ 2011 c 336 s 374; 1986 c 219 s 2; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 s 9A.52.090.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 5× “RCW 9A.52.090 provides several defenses to the above crime: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.”
City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 5× “RCW 9A.52.090 provides several defenses to the above crime: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.”
State v. Ponce, 269 P.3d 408 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 5× “From that, it concluded that the statutory defenses provided by RCW 9A.52.090 apply only to the charge of criminal trespass.”
State v. Olson, 329 P.3d 121 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “RCW 9A.52.090. RCW 9A-.52.090 provides, in pertinent part: Criminal trespass — Defenses.”
State v. Finley, 982 P.2d 681 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “Finley cites two provisions of RCW 9A.52.090 in his defense: *137 (2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or (3) The actor reasonably believed that the…”
State v. R.H., 939 P.2d 217 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 3× “]” RCW 9A.52.090(2). If a person so complies, that person is "privileged to .”
State v. Cordero, 284 P.3d 773 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “CP at 100. Mr. Cordero argued that the instruction was warranted by J.”
State v. J.P., 125 P.3d 215 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “” The State properly points out that RCW 9A.52.090 is clearly limited to the crime of criminal trespass by its terms.”
State v. Green, 157 Wash. App. 833 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “RCW 9A.52.090; City of Bremerton v. Widell, 146 Wn.”
State v. Jensen, 203 P.3d 393 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “080 [describing second degree criminal trespass], it is a defense that: (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.”
State v. Jensen, 149 Wash. App. 393 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “080 [describing second degree criminal trespass], it is a defense that: (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.”
State v. C.B., 380 P.3d 626 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “Carter argues on appeal that he asserted the defense provided by RCW 9A.52.090(2) (compliance with conditions of premises open to the public).”
Show all 46 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.52.090(1) — 9 cases
State v. Jensen, 203 P.3d 393 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “080 [describing second degree criminal trespass], it is a defense that: (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.”
State v. J.P., 125 P.3d 215 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “” The State properly points out that RCW 9A.52.090 is clearly limited to the crime of criminal trespass by its terms.”
State v. Olson, 329 P.3d 121 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “RCW 9A.52.090. RCW 9A-.52.090 provides, in pertinent part: Criminal trespass — Defenses.”
State Of Washington v. Erik Thomas Schumann (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).
State v. JP, 125 P.3d 215 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.52.090(2) — 22 cases
City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002). “RCW 9A.52.090 provides several defenses to the above crime: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.”
State v. R.H., 939 P.2d 217 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “]” RCW 9A.52.090(2). If a person so complies, that person is "privileged to .”
City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002). “RCW 9A.52.090 provides several defenses to the above crime: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.”
State v. C.B., 380 P.3d 626 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “Carter argues on appeal that he asserted the defense provided by RCW 9A.52.090(2) (compliance with conditions of premises open to the public).”
State v. Green, 157 Wash. App. 833 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “RCW 9A.52.090; City of Bremerton v. Widell, 146 Wn.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.52.090(3) — 13 cases
City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002). “RCW 9A.52.090 provides several defenses to the above crime: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.”
City of Bremerton v. Widell, 51 P.3d 733 (Wash. 2002). “RCW 9A.52.090 provides several defenses to the above crime: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.”
State v. Ponce, 269 P.3d 408 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “From that, it concluded that the statutory defenses provided by RCW 9A.52.090 apply only to the charge of criminal trespass.”
State v. Moreno, 499 P.3d 198 (Wash. 2021).
State Of Washington v. Ruslan Bezhenar (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.52.090(4) — 2 cases
State v. Duffey, 981 P.2d 1 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999).
Cyrus Y. Kim v. Best Buy & City Of Fed. Way (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.52.090(l) — 1 case
State v. Jensen, 149 Wash. App. 393 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “080 [describing second degree criminal trespass], it is a defense that: (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.”
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.