Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.82.001 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
This chapter shall be known as the criminal profiteering act.
[ 2001 c 222 s 2. Prior: 1985 c 455 s 1.]

Notes:

Purpose2001 c 222: "The purpose of this act is to respond to State v. Thomas, 103 Wn. App. 800, by reenacting, without substantive changes, the Washington laws relating to criminal profiteering, and the sentencing level ranking for criminal profiteering crimes as they existed prior to December 21, 2000." [ 2001 c 222 s 1.]
Effective date2001 c 222: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [May 9, 2001]." [ 2001 c 222 s 25.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2000–2008 · leading case: Keesling v. Beegle, 880 N.E.2d 1202 (Ind. 2008).
Keesling v. Beegle, 880 N.E.2d 1202 (Ind. 2008). · cites it 2× “(2007); Wash. Rev.Code Ann. § 9A.82.001 (2007). [9] See Colo.”
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. Gravano, 108 P.3d 251 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005). “22 §§ 1401 to 1419 (West 2002)(up to three times greater of gross gain or gross loss caused); Or.Rev.Stat. §§ 166.715 to .”
State v. Thomas, 14 P.3d 854 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “[8] Former RCW 9A.82.001 (Laws of 1985, ch. 455, § 1).”
State v. Thomas, 103 Wash. App. 800 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “Former RCW 9A.82.001 (Laws of 1985, ch. 455, § 1).”
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.