Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.090 (2026)
Permitting 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 is guilty of permitting prostitution if, having possession or control of premises which he or she knows are being used for prostitution purposes, he or she fails without lawful excuse to make reasonable effort to halt or abate such use.
(2) Permitting prostitution is a misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1982–1992 · leading case: State v. Johnson, 829 P.2d 1082 (Wash. 1992).
State v. Johnson, 829 P.2d 1082 (Wash. 1992). “080(1)(b) (count 1) and three counts of permitting prostitution in violation of RCW 9A.88.090 (counts 2 through 4). In a pretrial motion, and at trial, the defendant moved to dismiss counts 2 through 4 because there was no evidence that, on the dates which formed the bases for…”
State v. Johnson, 809 P.2d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “Janice Ann Johnson appeals her conviction on three counts of permitting prostitution, RCW 9A.88.090. We affirm her conviction on count 2 and reverse and remand for a new trial on counts 3 and 4.”
State v. Putnam, 639 P.2d 858 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). “RCW 9A.88.090. If a person violates RCW 9A.”
State v. Clark, 659 P.2d 554 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). “As outlined earlier, Clark was convicted of promoting prostitution in the second degree, RCW 9A.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.090(1) — 2 cases
State v. Johnson, 829 P.2d 1082 (Wash. 1992). “080(1)(b) (count 1) and three counts of permitting prostitution in violation of RCW 9A.88.090 (counts 2 through 4). In a pretrial motion, and at trial, the defendant moved to dismiss counts 2 through 4 because there was no evidence that, on the dates which formed the bases for…”
State v. Johnson, 809 P.2d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “Janice Ann Johnson appeals her conviction on three counts of permitting prostitution, RCW 9A.88.090. We affirm her conviction on count 2 and reverse and remand for a new trial on counts 3 and 4.”
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.