Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.60
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The following definitions and the definitions of RCW 9A.56.010 are applicable in this chapter unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) "Complete written instrument" means one which is fully drawn with respect to every essential feature thereof;
(2) To "falsely alter" a written instrument means to change, without authorization by anyone entitled to grant it, a written instrument, whether complete or incomplete, by means of erasure, obliteration, deletion, insertion of new matter, transposition of matter, or in any other manner;
(3) To "falsely complete" a written instrument means to transform an incomplete written instrument into a complete one by adding or inserting matter, without the authority of anyone entitled to grant it;
(4) To "falsely make" a written instrument means to make or draw a complete or incomplete written instrument which purports to be authentic, but which is not authentic either because the ostensible maker is fictitious or because, if real, he or she did not authorize the making or drawing thereof;
(5) "Forged digital likeness" means a visual representation of an actual and identifiable individual, or an audio recording of an actual and identifiable individual's voice, which:
(a) Has been digitally created, adapted, altered, or modified to be indistinguishable from a genuine visual representation or audio recording of the individual;
(b) Misrepresents the appearance, speech, or conduct of the individual; and
(c) Is likely to deceive a reasonable person into believing that the visual representation or audio recording is genuine;
(6) "Forged instrument" means a written instrument which has been falsely made, completed, or altered;
(7) "Incomplete written instrument" means one which contains some matter by way of content or authentication but which requires additional matter in order to render it a complete written instrument;
(8) "Visual representation" means any pictorial or motion picture representation, regardless of the media used;
(9) "Written instrument" means: (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equivalent; or (b) any access device, token, stamp, seal, badge, trademark, or other evidence or symbol of value, right, privilege, or identification.
[ 2025 c 51 s 1. Prior: 2011 c 336 s 381; 1999 c 143 s 38; 1987 c 140 s 5; 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 38 s 12; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 s 9A.60.010.]

Notes:

Reviser's note: The definitions in this section have been alphabetized pursuant to RCW 1.08.015(2)(k).
Effective date—Severability—1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 38: See notes following RCW 9A.08.020.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: In Re the Pers. Restraint of Keene, 622 P.2d 360 (Wash. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Keene, 622 P.2d 360 (Wash. 1981). · cites it 4× “To "falsely make" is defined in RCW 9A.60.010(4): (4) To "falsely make" a written instrument means to make or draw a complete or incomplete written instrument which purports to be authentic, but which is not authentic either because the ostensible maker is fictitious or because,…”
State v. Smith, 864 P.2d 406 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 7× “Comparing the definitions in proposed RCW 9A.60.010 with the definitions in then-existing RCW 9.”
State v. Hescock, 989 P.2d 1251 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “See RCW 9A.60.010(4) (“falsely make”); RCW 9A.”
State v. Scoby, 815 P.2d 1362 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 3× “He concludes that since there is no evidence the 1975 Legislature intended to change the law on this matter when it enacted RCW 9A.60.010 and .020, the term "written instrument" as defined in current RCW 9A60.”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of James, 640 P.2d 18 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 2× “The instrument was neither falsely made nor falsely completed.”
State v. Richards, 109 Wash. App. 648 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Former RCW 9A.60.010(1) (1987) defines a “written instrument” as follows: “Written instrument” means: (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equiva *654 lent; or (b) any access device,.”
State v. Ring, 364 P.3d 853 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “¶12 RCW 9A.60.010(7) defines “written instrument” as (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equivalent; or (b) any access device, token, stamp, seal, badge, trademark, or other evidence or symbol of value, right, privilege, or…”
State v. Aitken, 905 P.2d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “RCW 9A.60.010(4). Here, Alexander obviously did not authorize Aitken to use his name.”
State v. Sullivan, 621 P.2d 212 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 4× “*32 Neither of the two "offers" before us were made by the defendant, but by persons other than the defendant. Although defendant identified herself as "Miss Kinsella" at the beauty shop, it was a youth she had summoned by telephone who presented a Master Charge card 3 to the…”
State v. Edwards, 755 P.2d 821 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). “RCW 9A.60.010(5), .020. Edwards contends that the misappropriation conviction, coupled with the forgery conviction, subjects her to double jeopardy.”
State v. Richards, 36 P.3d 1119 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Former RCW 9A.60.010(1) (1987) defines a "written instrument" as follows: "Written instrument" means: (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equivalent; or (b) any access device, .”
State Of Washington v. Anthony J. Smith, 464 P.3d 554 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “Falsely Completed Bank Account Applications Smith argues that even if the bank account applications had legal efficacy, the State failed to establish that they were falsely completed.”
Show all 30 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(1) — 5 cases
State v. Smith, 864 P.2d 406 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). “Comparing the definitions in proposed RCW 9A.60.010 with the definitions in then-existing RCW 9.”
State v. Scoby, 815 P.2d 1362 (Wash. 1991). “He concludes that since there is no evidence the 1975 Legislature intended to change the law on this matter when it enacted RCW 9A.60.010 and .020, the term "written instrument" as defined in current RCW 9A60.”
State v. Richards, 109 Wash. App. 648 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Former RCW 9A.60.010(1) (1987) defines a “written instrument” as follows: “Written instrument” means: (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equiva *654 lent; or (b) any access device,.”
State v. Richards, 36 P.3d 1119 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Former RCW 9A.60.010(1) (1987) defines a "written instrument" as follows: "Written instrument" means: (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equivalent; or (b) any access device, .”
State Of Washington v. Nikolay v. Sidorko (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(4) — 8 cases
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Keene, 622 P.2d 360 (Wash. 1981). “To "falsely make" is defined in RCW 9A.60.010(4): (4) To "falsely make" a written instrument means to make or draw a complete or incomplete written instrument which purports to be authentic, but which is not authentic either because the ostensible maker is fictitious or because,…”
In Re the Pers. Restraint of James, 640 P.2d 18 (Wash. 1982). “The instrument was neither falsely made nor falsely completed.”
State v. Smith, 864 P.2d 406 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). “Comparing the definitions in proposed RCW 9A.60.010 with the definitions in then-existing RCW 9.”
State v. Hescock, 989 P.2d 1251 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “See RCW 9A.60.010(4) (“falsely make”); RCW 9A.”
State v. Aitken, 905 P.2d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). “RCW 9A.60.010(4). Here, Alexander obviously did not authorize Aitken to use his name.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(5) — 4 cases
In Re the Pers. Restraint of Keene, 622 P.2d 360 (Wash. 1981). “To "falsely make" is defined in RCW 9A.60.010(4): (4) To "falsely make" a written instrument means to make or draw a complete or incomplete written instrument which purports to be authentic, but which is not authentic either because the ostensible maker is fictitious or because,…”
State v. Hescock, 989 P.2d 1251 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “See RCW 9A.60.010(4) (“falsely make”); RCW 9A.”
State v. Edwards, 755 P.2d 821 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). “RCW 9A.60.010(5), .020. Edwards contends that the misappropriation conviction, coupled with the forgery conviction, subjects her to double jeopardy.”
State v. Daniels, 23 P.3d 1125 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(6) — 3 cases
State v. Hescock, 989 P.2d 1251 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “See RCW 9A.60.010(4) (“falsely make”); RCW 9A.”
State Of Washington, V. Catalina Marie Guillen (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
State Of Washington, V Christopher R. Koch (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(7) — 8 cases
State v. Ring, 364 P.3d 853 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “¶12 RCW 9A.60.010(7) defines “written instrument” as (a) Any paper, document, or other instrument containing written or printed matter or its equivalent; or (b) any access device, token, stamp, seal, badge, trademark, or other evidence or symbol of value, right, privilege, or…”
State v. Sullivan, 621 P.2d 212 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). “*32 Neither of the two "offers" before us were made by the defendant, but by persons other than the defendant. Although defendant identified herself as "Miss Kinsella" at the beauty shop, it was a youth she had summoned by telephone who presented a Master Charge card 3 to the…”
State Of Washington v. Anthony J. Smith, 464 P.3d 554 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Falsely Completed Bank Account Applications Smith argues that even if the bank account applications had legal efficacy, the State failed to establish that they were falsely completed.”
State v. Vasquez, 269 P.3d 370 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
State Of Washington v. John Ring (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(7)(a) — 1 case
State Of Washington v. Nikolay v. Sidorko (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(77) — 1 case
State Of Washington v. Randall Charles King (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(9) — 1 case
State Of Washington, V Zachary T. Cuzzetto (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.60.010(l)(b) — 3 cases
State v. Sullivan, 621 P.2d 212 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). “*32 Neither of the two "offers" before us were made by the defendant, but by persons other than the defendant. Although defendant identified herself as "Miss Kinsella" at the beauty shop, it was a youth she had summoned by telephone who presented a Master Charge card 3 to the…”
State v. White, 735 P.2d 684 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987).
State v. Standifer, 737 P.2d 1058 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987).
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.