Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9A · Chapter 9A.88
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.030 (2026)

Prostitution

✓ 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 age eighteen or older is guilty of prostitution if such person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.
(2) For purposes of this section, "sexual conduct" means "sexual intercourse" or "sexual contact," both as defined in chapter 9A.44 RCW.
(3) Prostitution is a misdemeanor.
[ 2020 c 331 s 4; 1988 c 145 s 16; 1979 ex.s. c 244 s 15; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 s 9A.88.030.]

Notes:

Effective date—2020 c 331 ss 4, 5, and 6: "Sections 4, 5, and 6 of this act take effect January 1, 2024." [ 2020 c 331 s 12.]
Finding—2020 c 331: See note following RCW 7.68.380.
Effective date—Savings—Application—1988 c 145: See notes following RCW 9A.44.010.
Effective date—1979 ex.s. c 244: See RCW 9A.44.902.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: State v. Zuanich, 593 P.2d 1314 (Wash. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Zuanich, 593 P.2d 1314 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 75× “A single question is presented by these appeals: Is RCW 9A.88.030 unconstitutionally void for vagueness? In each instance, these cases were dismissed prior to trial so that no factual determination was made as to the precise conduct in which defendants were engaged.”
State v. Wilbur, 749 P.2d 1295 (Wash. 1988). · cites it 13× “— Facts of Case At issue in this case is whether the state prostitution statute, RCW 9A.88.030, also applies to patrons of prostitutes.”
State v. Cann, 595 P.2d 912 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 5× “It is first argued that the statute does not meet constitutional standards of clarity because of the alleged vagueness of the definition of prostitution contained in RCW 9A.88.030. The arguments advanced here were before this court in State v.”
State v. Elliott, 785 P.2d 440 (Wash. 1990). · cites it 3× “Petitioner further claims that she was denied a unanimous jury verdict; that she was denied equal protection of the laws because she was charged with the felonies of promoting prostitution instead of the misdemeanors of being an "accomplice to prostitution" under RCW 9A.88.030…”
State v. Yancy, 594 P.2d 1342 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 6× “A cursory reading of the applicable statutes and the briefs, *161 including an amicus brief, discloses that the legislature defined "prostitution" in RCW 9A.88.030. Absent a constitutionally sound statutory definition of "prostitution" the charge brought under RCW 9A.”
Backpage.com, LLC v. McKenna, 881 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (W.D. Wash. 2012). · cites it 3× “" Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.88.030 (emphasis added).”
City of Yakima v. Emmons, 609 P.2d 973 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). “2d 1314 (1979), which held the term "sexual conduct" in the context of the analogous state prostitution statute, RCW 9A.88.030, was not unconstitutionally vague on its face.”
State v. Shuck, 661 P.2d 1020 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). “060; RCW 9A.88.030. The child pornography statute is designed to prevent that which its name suggests: photographing or displaying sexually explicit conduct by minors.”
State v. Johnson, 809 P.2d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “(2) Permitting prostitution is a misdemeanor. The offense of prostitution is committed where a "person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.”
Ludeman v. Dep't of Health, 951 P.2d 266 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “Prostitution is defined by RCW 9A.88.030: (1) A person is guilty of prostitution if such person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.”
State v. Merrill, 597 P.2d 446 (Wash. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 3× “060, 2 the statutes under which he was convicted, as being unconstitutionally vague because the definition of *579 prostitution in RCW 9A.88.030 3 is also unconstitutionally vague.”
City of Yakima v. Johnson, 553 P.2d 1104 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976). “010 and it is apparent that the dictionary definitions were in essence incorporated into the newly adopted prostitution statute, RCW 9A.88.030. 3 The number of males and females arrested for prostitution over a 10-year period was as follows: 1974, 67 females, 1 male; 1973, 58…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.030(1) — 5 cases
State v. Wilbur, 749 P.2d 1295 (Wash. 1988). “— Facts of Case At issue in this case is whether the state prostitution statute, RCW 9A.88.030, also applies to patrons of prostitutes.”
State v. Zuanich, 593 P.2d 1314 (Wash. 1979). “A single question is presented by these appeals: Is RCW 9A.88.030 unconstitutionally void for vagueness? In each instance, these cases were dismissed prior to trial so that no factual determination was made as to the precise conduct in which defendants were engaged.”
State Of Washington, V Joshua Jones (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
State of Washington v. Steven Bernard Pallett (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
In the Matter of the Pers. Restraint of: Edward Leon Nelson (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.030(2) — 2 cases
State of Washington v. Steven Bernard Pallett (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
In the Matter of the Pers. Restraint of: Edward Leon Nelson (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.030(3) — 1 case
State Of Washington, V Joshua Jones (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.