Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.56
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.56.170 (2026)

Possessing stolen property in the third 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 possessing stolen property in the third degree if he or she possesses (a) stolen property which does not exceed seven hundred fifty dollars in value, or (b) ten or more stolen merchandise pallets, or ten or more stolen beverage crates, or a combination of ten or more stolen merchandise pallets and beverage crates.
(2) Possessing stolen property in the third degree is a gross misdemeanor.
[ 2009 c 431 s 14; 1998 c 236 s 2; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 s 9A.56.170.]

Notes:

Applicability—2009 c 431: See note following RCW 4.24.230.
Property crime database, liability: RCW 4.24.340.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1978–2025 · leading case: State v. Tinker, 118 P.3d 885 (Wash. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Tinker, 118 P.3d 885 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 2× “RCW 9A.56.170(1)." Id. at 926 , 602 P.2d 1188 .”
State v. Tinker, 155 Wash. 2d 219 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 2× “RCW 9A.56.170(1).” Id. at 926 . The third degree possession of stolen property statute tracks the third degree theft statute in stating that “[a] person is guilty .”
State v. Rhinehart, 602 P.2d 1188 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 2× “RCW 9A.56.170(1). The Court of Appeals reasoned that "[b]ecause one could not be guilty of possessing stolen property in the first degree without also being guilty of possessing stolen property in the third degree, the latter is *927 a lesser included offense of the former.”
State v. Zibell, 646 P.2d 154 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “[4] "`Possessing stolen property' means knowingly to receive, retain, possess, conceal, or dispose of stolen property knowing that it has been stolen and to withhold or appropriate the same to the use of any person other than the true owner or person entitled thereto.”
State v. Jones, 591 P.2d 796 (Wash. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “We remand for resentencing pursuant to the gross misdemeanor defined by RCW 9A.56.170 as third-degree possession.”
State v. Rhinehart, 586 P.2d 124 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 4× “140(1) defines the offense of possession of stolen property: "Possessing stolen property" means knowingly to receive, retain, possess, conceal, or dispose of stolen property knowing that it has been stolen and to withhold or appropriate the same to the use of any person other…”
State v. Keller, 647 P.2d 35 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). “…only the refiling of the charge of possession of stolen property in the third degree, which is a gross misdemeanor. RCW 9A.56.170.”
State v. Jennings, 728 P.2d 1064 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “RCW 9A.56.170. The 1-year jail sentence was to run concurrently with the 5- *859 year sentence.”
State of Washington v. Timothy Wayne Hampton (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 5× “The obtainment of this information I believe will assist in the identification of the individual(s) engaged in activities in violation of RCW 9A.56.170, Possess Stolen Property in the Third Degree; RCW 9A.”
State of Washington v. Jose G. Barboza-Cortes, 425 P.3d 856 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “020(1); RCW 9A.56.170. 16 No. 34356-1-III State v.”
State Of Washington, V W.n. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “argues that (1) the State presented insufficient evidence to support his adjudication of third degree possessing stolen property because the State failed to show that he had knowledge that the property was stolen and (2) the information was constitutionally deficient because it…”
State Of Washington v. Gary Lee Noble (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “3 RCW 9A.56.170(1). The jury found Noble guilty of third degree possession of stolen property, and this charge is not at issue in this appeal.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.56.170(1) — 7 cases
State v. Tinker, 118 P.3d 885 (Wash. 2005). “RCW 9A.56.170(1)." Id. at 926 , 602 P.2d 1188 .”
State v. Tinker, 155 Wash. 2d 219 (Wash. 2005). “RCW 9A.56.170(1).” Id. at 926 . The third degree possession of stolen property statute tracks the third degree theft statute in stating that “[a] person is guilty .”
State v. Rhinehart, 602 P.2d 1188 (Wash. 1979). “RCW 9A.56.170(1). The Court of Appeals reasoned that "[b]ecause one could not be guilty of possessing stolen property in the first degree without also being guilty of possessing stolen property in the third degree, the latter is *927 a lesser included offense of the former.”
State v. Rhinehart, 586 P.2d 124 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). “140(1) defines the offense of possession of stolen property: "Possessing stolen property" means knowingly to receive, retain, possess, conceal, or dispose of stolen property knowing that it has been stolen and to withhold or appropriate the same to the use of any person other…”
State v. Zibell, 646 P.2d 154 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). “[4] "`Possessing stolen property' means knowingly to receive, retain, possess, conceal, or dispose of stolen property knowing that it has been stolen and to withhold or appropriate the same to the use of any person other than the true owner or person entitled thereto.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.56.170(1)(a) — 1 case
State Of Washington, V W.n. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “argues that (1) the State presented insufficient evidence to support his adjudication of third degree possessing stolen property because the State failed to show that he had knowledge that the property was stolen and (2) the information was constitutionally deficient because it…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.56.170(2) — 2 cases
State v. Zibell, 646 P.2d 154 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). “[4] "`Possessing stolen property' means knowingly to receive, retain, possess, conceal, or dispose of stolen property knowing that it has been stolen and to withhold or appropriate the same to the use of any person other than the true owner or person entitled thereto.”
State Of Washington v. Scott E. Collins (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.