Washington
Washington Surveillance Camera Laws (2026 Guide)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 16, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 16, 2026. · 11 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Washington allows video-only surveillance cameras on private property for home and business use, but requires all-party consent before recording any audio under RCW 9.73.030. Recording a private conversation without consent is a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to 364 days in jail and a $5,000 fine.
Washington has some of the strictest audio recording laws in the United States. The state requires consent from all parties before any private conversation can be recorded. However, the rules for video-only surveillance cameras are more flexible. Understanding the difference between audio and video recording is critical for anyone using security cameras, workplace monitoring systems, or home recording devices in Washington.
This guide covers every major area of Washington surveillance camera law, from residential security cameras to workplace monitoring, hidden cameras, nanny cams, neighbor disputes, and the penalties for violations.
Washington's All-Party Consent Law (RCW 9.73.030)
The foundation of Washington surveillance law is RCW 9.73.030, the state's wiretapping and eavesdropping statute. This law makes it illegal to intercept or record any private communication without first obtaining the consent of all participants.
The statute covers private communications transmitted by telephone, radio, or any electronic device, as well as any private conversation recorded or transmitted by any means. This all-party consent requirement is sometimes called "two-party consent," but the actual standard requires every person involved in the conversation to agree to the recording.
How Consent Works
Under RCW 9.73.030, consent is considered obtained when one party announces to all other parties, in any reasonably effective manner, that the communication is about to be recorded. The announcement itself must also be recorded. Simply having a sign posted may not satisfy this requirement for private conversations.
For example, if you call a business and hear "this call may be recorded for quality assurance," that announcement satisfies the consent requirement as long as you stay on the line. If you object and continue speaking, the recording may still be considered consensual because you were informed and chose to continue.
Exceptions to the All-Party Rule
Washington law provides specific exceptions where only one party needs to consent to a recording:
- Emergency communications involving reports of fires, medical emergencies, crimes, or disasters
- Threatening communications that convey threats of extortion, blackmail, or bodily harm
- Nuisance calls that are anonymous, repeated, or made at extremely inconvenient hours
- Hostage situations involving communications with a hostage holder or barricaded person
These exceptions are narrowly defined. Outside of these situations, recording a private conversation without all-party consent is a crime in Washington.
The Journalism Exception
Employees of newspapers, magazines, wire services, radio stations, or television stations who are performing news gathering duties are considered to have consent if the other party expressly agrees to be recorded, or if the recording device is readily apparent and obvious to the speakers.
Home Security Cameras in Washington
Washington residents can legally install security cameras on their own property. The key legal distinction is between video recording and audio recording.

Video-Only Cameras Are Generally Legal
Video surveillance that does not capture audio is broadly permitted on your own property. You can place cameras on your home's exterior walls, in your driveway, on your porch, in your garage, and in common areas inside your home without needing consent from anyone who might be recorded.
The legal basis is straightforward: Washington's privacy statute (RCW 9.73.030) specifically addresses the interception or recording of private communications and conversations. Silent video recording does not capture communications or conversations, so it falls outside the scope of this law.
Audio Recording Requires Consent
If your security camera system records audio, Washington's all-party consent law applies. This means you need consent from every person whose private conversation the camera captures. Many modern security cameras, including popular doorbell cameras, have built-in microphones that record audio by default.
If you use cameras with audio capabilities at home, you have two practical options:
- Disable the audio recording feature on your cameras entirely
- Post clear notices informing visitors that audio and video recording is in progress, and ensure the notice is visible before they enter the area
Posting a visible sign may help establish implied consent for casual visitors, but it may not satisfy the statutory requirement for recording truly private conversations. The safest approach for residential use is to turn off audio recording.
The Building Owner Exception (RCW 9.73.110)
Under RCW 9.73.110, building owners have a special exception. It is not unlawful for the owner of a building to intercept, record, or disclose communications that occur within the building if the persons being recorded are committing a criminal act through unlawful entry or by remaining unlawfully in the building.
This exception is narrow. It only applies when someone is actively trespassing or has broken into your property. It does not allow general audio recording of guests, workers, or family members in your home.
Workplace Surveillance Cameras in Washington
Employers in Washington can use video surveillance cameras in the workplace, but they must follow specific rules to stay within the law.
Where Employers Can Place Cameras
Video cameras are permitted in areas where employees and visitors do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Common legal locations include:
- Building entrances and exits
- Hallways and corridors
- Parking lots and garages
- Loading docks and shipping areas
- Retail sales floors
- Lobbies and reception areas
- Warehouse and production floors
Where Cameras Are Prohibited
Employers cannot place cameras in locations where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy. These restricted areas include:
- Restrooms and bathrooms
- Locker rooms and changing areas
- Break rooms (depending on the circumstances and whether conversations occur)
- Private offices with closed doors (without notice)
- Any area designated for personal activities
Audio Recording in the Workplace
Because Washington is an all-party consent state, employers cannot record workplace conversations without the consent of all participants. This applies to both in-person conversations and phone calls. An employer who installs security cameras with active microphones in a workplace could face criminal charges under RCW 9.73.030.
If an employer wants to record audio in the workplace, every employee must be informed and must consent. This is typically handled through written policies that employees sign as a condition of employment. Even then, recording in areas like break rooms where personal conversations occur may raise legal issues.
Employee Notification
While Washington does not have a specific statute requiring employers to notify employees about video-only surveillance, best practices and potential liability concerns make notification advisable. Employers should:
- Include surveillance policies in employee handbooks
- Post visible signs where cameras are installed
- Inform new employees about camera locations during onboarding
- Consult with employees or union representatives before installing new cameras
Union Workplaces
If a workplace is unionized, the employer is generally required to bargain with the union before installing surveillance cameras. The National Labor Relations Act protects workers' rights to organize, and surveillance cameras in work areas could be seen as an attempt to monitor union activity.
Hidden Cameras and Voyeurism Laws
Washington has strict laws against using hidden cameras to invade someone's privacy. The state's voyeurism statute, RCW 9A.44.115, creates serious criminal penalties for using cameras to secretly observe or photograph people in private situations.
Voyeurism in the First Degree (Class C Felony)
A person commits voyeurism in the first degree by knowingly viewing, photographing, or filming another person without that person's knowledge and consent for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification when:
- The person being recorded is in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, or
- The recording captures the intimate areas of a person without that person's knowledge and consent, under circumstances where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, whether in a public or private place
"Intimate areas" means any portion of a person's body or undergarments that is covered by clothing and intended to be protected from public view.
A "place where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy" includes any location where a reasonable person would believe they could disrobe in privacy, or where they could reasonably expect to be safe from surveillance.
Penalties for first-degree voyeurism:
| Consequence | Details |
|---|---|
| Criminal classification | Class C felony |
| Maximum prison sentence | 5 years in a state correctional facility |
| Maximum fine | $10,000 |
| Sex offender registration | Required for 10 years after release (first offense with no prior sex offenses) |
Voyeurism in the Second Degree (Gross Misdemeanor)
A person commits voyeurism in the second degree by intentionally photographing or filming intimate areas of another person without consent, with the intent to distribute or disseminate the images, under circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Penalties for second-degree voyeurism:
| Consequence | Details |
|---|---|
| Criminal classification | Gross misdemeanor |
| Maximum jail sentence | 364 days in county jail |
| Maximum fine | $5,000 |
| Sex offender registration | Not required |
Court-Ordered Destruction of Images
Washington courts have the authority to order the destruction of any photographs, films, or other recordings that were made in violation of the voyeurism statute. This means that illegal recordings can be seized and permanently destroyed as part of the criminal case.
Nanny Cams in Washington
Using a nanny cam in your home is legal in Washington, but the rules depend on whether the camera records audio.
Video-Only Nanny Cams
A video-only nanny cam is legal to use in Washington without informing your nanny or caregiver. There is no state law that requires homeowners to disclose the presence of a hidden video camera in their own home, as long as the camera does not record in a private area like a bathroom or a bedroom used by a live-in employee.
Legal locations for video-only nanny cams include living rooms, kitchens, playrooms, nurseries, and any common area of the home.
Audio-Recording Nanny Cams
If your nanny cam records audio, Washington's all-party consent law (RCW 9.73.030) applies. You must inform your nanny that audio recording is taking place and obtain their consent before recording begins. The best practice is to:
- Provide written notice that audio recording occurs in the home
- Have the nanny sign an acknowledgment of the notice
- Keep the signed document in your records
Failure to obtain consent for audio recording is a gross misdemeanor, even if the recording takes place in your own home. The privacy statute does not contain a homeowner exemption for audio recording of conversations.
Cameras in Private Spaces
Regardless of whether the camera records audio, you should never place a nanny cam in a bathroom, a bedroom used by the nanny (if they live in your home), or any other area where the caregiver would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Doing so could result in voyeurism charges under RCW 9A.44.115.
Neighbor Disputes Over Security Cameras
Disputes between neighbors about security cameras are common in Washington. The law provides a framework for resolving these conflicts.
What You Can Record
You can point your security cameras at areas visible from your property that are not considered private. Legal recording targets include:
- Your own property (front yard, driveway, backyard)
- Public streets and sidewalks
- Shared common areas in apartment complexes or condominiums
- Your neighbor's front yard or any area visible from the public right-of-way
People do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in areas that are openly visible to the public.
What You Cannot Record
Pointing your camera to deliberately capture activity in areas where your neighbor has a reasonable expectation of privacy could violate Washington law. Areas you should avoid recording include:
- A neighbor's windows, especially bedrooms and bathrooms
- Fenced backyards that are not visible from public areas
- Enclosed patios or screened porches
- Any area where a neighbor would reasonably expect to be unobserved
Audio Recording of Neighbors
Washington's all-party consent law applies to any private conversation your camera might capture from a neighbor's property. If your outdoor security camera records audio and picks up your neighbor's private conversations, you could be violating RCW 9.73.030. This is one of the strongest reasons to disable audio recording on outdoor cameras in Washington.
HOA and Local Restrictions
Beyond state law, your homeowners association (HOA) may have additional rules governing security cameras. Common HOA restrictions include:
- Requiring architectural approval before installing exterior cameras
- Limiting camera placement to certain areas
- Restricting the size, style, or visibility of cameras
- Prohibiting cameras that point toward common areas or neighboring units
Check your HOA's covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) before installing cameras. Some cities and counties in Washington may also have local ordinances that affect camera placement.
Resolving Disputes
If a neighbor's camera is causing you concern, consider these steps:
- Talk to your neighbor and explain your privacy concerns
- Review HOA rules to see if the camera placement violates any community guidelines
- Document the camera's position and what it appears to record
- Contact local law enforcement if you believe the camera is capturing private areas or recording audio without consent
- Consult an attorney if informal resolution fails, especially if you believe your privacy rights are being violated
Adult Family Homes and Care Facilities
Washington has specific regulations for electronic monitoring in adult family homes under WAC 388-76-10720.
Audio Monitoring Is Prohibited
Adult family homes cannot use audio monitoring equipment or video monitoring equipment that includes an audio component, except in very limited circumstances defined by regulation.
Video-Only Monitoring Is Allowed in Specific Areas
Video cameras without audio capability are permitted in certain locations:
- Entrances and exits with cameras focused only on doorways, not gathering areas
- Outdoor public-access areas such as driveways or walkways, for theft and property damage prevention
- Designated smoking areas when residents have been assessed as needing smoking supervision, and staff must actively monitor the feed while residents use the area
Notification and Consent
Adult family homes must provide written notice to all residents identifying every person or organization with access to electronic monitoring. Residents must sign an acknowledgment confirming they received the notification.
The presence of cameras does not reduce the facility's obligation to provide appropriate in-person care and assistance based on each resident's individual needs.
Criminal Penalties for Illegal Surveillance
Washington imposes both criminal and civil penalties for illegal surveillance activity.
Criminal Charges Under RCW 9.73.080
Violating Washington's wiretapping and eavesdropping law is a gross misdemeanor under RCW 9.73.080. A person convicted of this offense faces:
| Penalty | Maximum |
|---|---|
| Jail time | 364 days in county jail |
| Fine | $5,000 |
RCW 9.73.080(2) adds a separate gross misdemeanor for knowingly altering, erasing, or wrongfully disclosing a recording in violation of RCW 9.73.090(1)(c), which covers the sound recordings that correspond to video images from cameras mounted in law enforcement vehicles. That provision is narrow and does not reach private security camera footage.
Voyeurism Penalties
As detailed above, voyeurism in the first degree is a class C felony with up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine, plus mandatory sex offender registration. Voyeurism in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor with up to 364 days in jail and a $5,000 fine.
Inadmissible Evidence
Under RCW 9.73.050, any information obtained through illegal interception or recording is inadmissible in any civil or criminal court proceeding. This means that illegally recorded audio cannot be used as evidence, regardless of what it captures.
Civil Remedies for Victims
Victims of illegal surveillance in Washington can pursue civil lawsuits under RCW 9.73.060.
Available Damages
A person injured by a privacy violation can recover:
- Actual damages, including compensation for mental pain and suffering caused by the violation
- Liquidated damages calculated at $100 per day for each day the violation continued, up to a maximum of $1,000
- Reasonable attorney fees and other costs of litigation
Who Can Be Held Liable
The civil liability provision applies to anyone who commits the violation directly or who hires a detective agency or other agent to carry out the surveillance. Both the person who ordered the surveillance and the person who conducted it can be held liable.
Key Washington Surveillance Statutes at a Glance
| Statute | What It Covers |
|---|---|
| RCW 9.73.030 | All-party consent requirement for recording private communications |
| RCW 9.73.060 | Civil damages for privacy violations (actual damages + up to $1,000 liquidated damages) |
| RCW 9.73.080 | Criminal penalties for violations (gross misdemeanor) |
| RCW 9.73.110 | Building owner exception for recording trespassers |
| RCW 9A.44.115 | Voyeurism (first degree: class C felony; second degree: gross misdemeanor) |
| WAC 388-76-10720 | Electronic monitoring rules for adult family homes |
Related Washington Camera and Privacy Laws
- Washington Recording Laws covers the consent rule that governs camera audio in Washington.
- Washington Security Camera Recording Rules explains the recording-law side of camera use.
- Washington Biometric Privacy Laws addresses facial recognition and biometric data.
- Washington Ring Doorbell Laws covers video doorbell rules in Washington.
Common Camera Questions
These national guides answer the most common surveillance camera questions:
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Washington a one-party or two-party consent state for recording?
Washington is an all-party (commonly called two-party) consent state under RCW 9.73.030. Every person participating in a private conversation must consent before the conversation can be legally recorded. This applies to both in-person conversations and phone calls.
Can I have security cameras with audio outside my home in Washington?
You can have outdoor security cameras, but recording audio from private conversations without all-party consent violates RCW 9.73.030. The safest approach is to disable audio recording on outdoor cameras, especially if they might pick up conversations from neighboring properties.
Are hidden nanny cams legal in Washington?
Video-only nanny cams are legal in Washington without notifying your caregiver, as long as they are not placed in bathrooms, bedrooms used by live-in employees, or other private areas. However, if the nanny cam records audio, you must inform the caregiver and obtain consent under Washington's all-party consent law.
Can my employer record me at work in Washington state?
Employers can use video-only cameras in common work areas like hallways, entrances, and sales floors. Cameras cannot be placed in restrooms, locker rooms, or other private areas. Audio recording of workplace conversations requires consent from all parties under RCW 9.73.030.
What are the penalties for illegal surveillance in Washington?
Violating Washington's wiretapping law (RCW 9.73.030) is a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to 364 days in jail and a $5,000 fine. Voyeurism in the first degree under RCW 9A.44.115 is a class C felony carrying up to 5 years in prison, a $10,000 fine, and mandatory sex offender registration. Victims can also sue for actual damages, liquidated damages up to $1,000, and attorney fees.
Updates
Tightened the voyeurism and recording-tampering sections to match the statutory text: first-degree voyeurism now states the reasonable-expectation-of-privacy element for intimate-area recordings, and the second gross misdemeanor under RCW 9.73.080 is now correctly limited to law enforcement vehicle-camera audio rather than any privacy-law violation.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Revised Code of Washington
§ 9.73.030Intercepting, recording, or divulging private communication—Consent required—Exceptions.In forcecited in 41 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, it shall be unlawful for any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or the state of Washington, its agencies, and political subdivisions to intercept, or record any: (a) Private communication transmitted by telephone, telegraph, radio, or other device between two or more individuals between points within or without the state by any device electronic or otherwise designed to record and/or transmit said communication regardless how such device is powered or actuated, without first obtaining the consent of all the participants in the communication; (b) Private conversation, by any device electronic or otherwise designed to record or transmit such conversation regardless how the device is powered or actuated without first obtaining the consent of all the persons engaged in the conversation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 221 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Washington courts have policed what counts as a private communication under Sec. 9.73.030: State v. Gunwall (1986) concluded a pen register intercept comes within a private communication transmitted by telephone, while State v. Riley (1993) held a line trap that reveals only the calling number does not record one.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Salinas (Washington Supreme Court 1992, 119 Wash. 2d 192)“…alties for divulging a telegram or opening a sealed letter. RCW 9.73.030-.070, making it unlawful to intercept,…”
- State v. Gunwall (Washington Supreme Court 1986, 106 Wash. 2d 54)✓Everett police pulled a suspected cocaine dealer's toll records and put a pen register on her line without valid legal process; the court held a pen register intercept is a private communication transmitted by telephone, installable only under the eavesdropping statutes.
- State v. Brown (Washington Supreme Court 1997, 132 Wash. 2d 529)✓Palm Springs officers secretly recorded a Washington murder suspect's statements after his arrest; the court treated RCW 9.73.090, not 9.73.030, as the provision reaching recordings of arrested persons, and held the Privacy Act did not require suppressing that recording.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: US Recording Laws by State (2026): All 50 States Explained, Washington Recording Laws (2026): All-Party Consent Rules, Federal Wiretap Act and ECPA: The Complete Guide (2026)
§ 9.73.050Admissibility of intercepted communication in evidence.In forcecited in 11 of our articles
Any information obtained in violation of RCW 9.73.030 or pursuant to any order issued under the provisions of RCW 9.73.040 shall be inadmissible in any civil or criminal case in all courts of general or limited jurisdiction in this state, except with the permission of the person whose rights have been violated in an action brought for damages under the provisions of RCW 9.73.030 through 9.73.080, or in a criminal action in which the defendant is charged with a crime, the commission of which would jeopardize national security.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 116 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wanrow (Washington Supreme Court 1977, 88 Wash. 2d 221)“…epartment of an emergency telephone call, on the basis that RCW 9.73.050 and RCW 9.73.090 which authorize the re…”
- State v. Rupe (Washington Supreme Court 1984, 101 Wash. 2d 664)“…find that this statement violated the terms of the statute. RCW 9.73.050 provides that information obtained in v…”
- State v. Fjermestad (Washington Supreme Court 1990, 114 Wash. 2d 828)“…At the time RCW 9.73.040 was enacted, the Legislature added RCW 9.73.050 4 which deals with admissibility of *…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Audio Recording Laws: Two-Party Consent Rules and Penalties (2026), Washington Dashcam Laws: Mounting Rules, Audio Recording, and Evidence (2026), Washington Medical Recording Laws: Recording Doctors, Hospitals, and Telehealth (2026)
§ 9.73.060Violating right of privacy—Civil action—Liability for damages.In forcecited in 14 of our articles
Any person who, directly or by means of a detective agency or any other agent, violates the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to legal action for damages, to be brought by any other person claiming that a violation of this statute has injured his or her business, his or her person, or his or her reputation. A person so injured shall be entitled to actual damages, including mental pain and suffering endured by him or her on account of violation of the provisions of this chapter, or liquidated damages computed at the rate of one hundred dollars a day for each day of violation, not to exceed one thousand dollars, and a reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of litigation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 36 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Washington courts read RCW 9.73.060 as supplying civil damages only for conduct chapter 9.73 prohibits. Kearney v. Kearney (1999) held RCW 9.73.050 creates no civil liability for filing illegally recorded material. Dillon v. Seattle Deposition Reporters, LLC (2014) reversed summary judgment on secretly transcribed calls.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wanrow (Washington Supreme Court 1977, 88 Wash. 2d 221)“…case under RCW 9.73.050; there is no civil liability under RCW 9.73.060; and, there is no criminal liability un…”
- Kearney v. Kearney (Court of Appeals of Washington 1999, 95 Wash. App. 405)✓A father sued a guardian ad litem, an evaluator and an attorney under RCW 9.73.060 for filing transcripts of calls with his children that his estranged wife taped; the court held the act creates liability only for recording or intercepting, not filing, and affirmed dismissal.
- Dillon v. Seattle Deposition Reporters, LLC (Court of Appeals of Washington 2014, 179 Wash. App. 41)“…act is a gross misdemeanor and is also actionable in tort. RCW 9.73.060, .080. “We engage in a four-pronged ana…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Landlord-Tenant Recording and Surveillance Laws (2026), Washington Phone Call Recording Laws: Consent Rules and Exceptions (2026), Washington Laws on Recording in Public: What Is Legal and What Is Not (2026)
§ 9.73.080Penalties.In forcecited in 16 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any person who violates RCW 9.73.030 is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (2) Any person who knowingly alters, erases, or wrongfully discloses any recording in violation of RCW 9.73.090(1)(c) is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 13 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wanrow (Washington Supreme Court 1977, 88 Wash. 2d 221)“…9.73.090, which opens with a waiver of RCW 9.73.030 through RCW 9.73.080, [9] i.e., the recording is not unlaw…”
- State v. Williams (Washington Supreme Court 1980, 94 Wash. 2d 531)✓ATF agents recorded a suspect's conversations with an informant and undercover agents with only one party's consent. The court assumed without deciding that the RCW 9.73.080 criminal penalty may not reach federal agents, but held the tapes were still inadmissible in state court.
- State v. Clark (Washington Supreme Court 2007, 916 P.2d 384)“…Violation of RCW 9.73.030 constitutes a gross misdemeanor, RCW 9.73.080, and may also result in civil liability…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Security Camera Laws: Rules for Home and Business Surveillance (2026), Washington Video Recording Laws: Filming, Surveillance, and Consent Rules (2026), Washington Workplace Recording Laws: Employee Rights and Employer Rules (2026)
§ 9.73.110Intercepting, recording, or disclosing private communications—Not unlawful for building owner—Conditions.In forcecited in 6 of our articles
It shall not be unlawful for the owner or person entitled to use and possession of a building, as defined in RCW 9A.04.110(5), or the agent of such person, to intercept, record, or disclose communications or conversations which occur within such building if the persons engaged in such communication or conversation are engaged in a criminal act at the time of such communication or conversation by virtue of unlawful entry or remaining unlawfully in such building.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Also relied on in: Washington Ring Doorbell Laws: What You Need to Know in 2026
§ 9.92.020Punishment of gross misdemeanor when not fixed by statute.In forcecited in 5 of our articles
Every person convicted of a gross misdemeanor for which no punishment is prescribed in any statute in force at the time of conviction and sentence, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a maximum term fixed by the court of up to three hundred sixty-four days, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of not more than five thousand dollars, or by both such imprisonment and fine.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 37 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Lewis (Court of Appeals of Washington 1976, 15 Wash. App. 172)“…eached after an examination of RCW 9.01.020, 4 RCW 9.92.020, 5 and RCW 9.95.010, the c…”
- Robinson v. Peterson (Washington Supreme Court 1976, 87 Wash. 2d 665)“…ls in which the maximum sentence is for a period of 1 year (RCW 9.92.020), most occupancies being of much briefe…”
- Mortell v. State (Court of Appeals of Washington 2003, 118 Wash. App. 846)“…heme. Several provisions comprise this sentencing scheme. RCW 9.92.020 reads, in part, “Every person convicted…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026)
§ 9A.20.021Maximum sentences for crimes committed July 1, 1984, and after.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) Felony. Unless a different maximum sentence for a classified felony is specifically established by a statute of this state, no person convicted of a classified felony shall be punished by confinement or fine exceeding the following: (a) For a class A felony, by confinement in a state correctional institution for a term of life imprisonment, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of fifty thousand dollars, or by both such confinement and fine; (b) For a class B felony, by confinement in a state correctional institution for a term of ten years, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of twenty thousand dollars, or by both such confinement and fine; (c) For a class C felony, by confinement in a state correctional institution for five years, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of ten thousand dollars, or by both such confinement and fine. (2) Gross misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 505 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Manussier (Washington Supreme Court 1996, 129 Wash. 2d 652)“…93 violates this constitutional provision because it amends RCW 9A.20.021, the section of the criminal code provi…”
- State v. Ritchie (Washington Supreme Court 1995, 126 Wash. 2d 388)“…tence for this class A felony offense is life imprisonment. RCW 9A.20.021(1)(a). The trial court imposed an excep…”
- State v. Anderson (Washington Supreme Court 2000, 141 Wash. 2d 357)“…t a *1252 maximum term of five years' imprisonment ( see RCW 9A.20.021) is clearly a factor that weighs in fav…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Hit and Run Laws: Penalties and What to Do
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- RCW 9.73.030 - Intercepting, recording, or divulging private communication(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.060 - Civil action and liability for damages(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.080 - Penalties for privacy violations(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.110 - Building owner recording exception(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9A.44.115 - Voyeurism statute(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9A.20.021 - Maximum sentences for crimes(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.92.020 - Punishment of gross misdemeanor(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.050 - Admissibility of intercepted communications(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- WAC 388-76-10720 - Electronic monitoring in adult family homes(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- Chapter 9.73 RCW - Privacy, Violating Right Of(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- Washington Attorney General - Video and Audio Recording of Communications(atg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.090 - Certain emergency communications and law enforcement recordings exempted(app.leg.wa.gov)