SB 6362 — Concerning judicial processes.

Bill Text

• Bill View text Current pdf

Compared against the Revised Code of Washington as published AI-generated reading aid — verify against the official bill.

This bill amends 6 section(s) of the Revised Code of Washington: RCW 2.43.070; RCW 7.105.200; RCW 7.105.205; RCW 7.105.245; RCW 7.105.310; RCW 7.105.450.

• RCW 2.43.070

  as follows: (1) Subject to the availability of funds, the administrative office of the courts shall establish and maintain a credentialing program for spoken language interpreters and administer comprehensive testing. (2) The administrative office of the courts shall work cooperatively with public or private educational institutions, and with other public or private organizations to establish suitable training programs and engage in recruitment efforts to ensure the availability of credentialed interpreters. Training programs shall be made readily available in both eastern and western Washington locations. Training programs shall include trainings on mutually unintelligible languages. (3) The administrative office of the courts shall establish and adopt standards of proficiency, written and oral, and, if applicable, tonal, in English and the language to be interpreted. (4) The administrative office of the courts shall conduct periodic examinations to ensure the availability of credentialed interpreters. Periodic examinations shall be made readily available in both eastern and western Washington locations. (5) The administrative office of the courts shall compile, maintain, and disseminate a current list of interpreters credentialed by the office. (6) The administrative office of the courts may charge reasonable fees for testing, training, and credentialing. (7) The administrative office of the courts may create different credentials, including heightened credentials for interpreters interpreting in the simultaneous mode,

  amended

• RCW 7.105.200

  should be sealed pursuant to court rule and governing law, it may enter an order sealing the documents. (10) When a petitioner has alleged incapacity to consent to sexual conduct or sexual penetration due to intoxicants, alcohol, or other condition, the court must determine on the record whether the petitioner had the capacity to consent. (11) Courts shall not require parties to submit duplicate or working copies of pleadings or other materials filed with the court, unless the document or documents cannot be scanned or are illegible. (12) Courts shall, if possible, have petitioners and respondents in protection order proceedings gather in separate locations and enter and depart the court room at staggered times. Where the option is available, for safety purposes, the court should arrange for petitioners to leave the court premises first and to have court security escort petitioners to their vehicles or transportation. (13) If a party has limited English proficiency, the court shall ensure that such party has reasonable time to confer with an interpreter appointed under RCW 7.105.245 during court recesses before continuing a hearing.

  amended

• RCW 7.105.205

  (f) To help ensure that remote access does not undermine personal safety or privacy, or introduce other risks, courts should protect the privacy of telephone numbers, emails, and other contact information for parties, witnesses, and others authorized by this chapter to participate in protection order proceedings, and inform them of these safety considerations. Materials available to persons appearing remotely should include warnings not to state their addresses or telephone numbers at the hearing, and that they should ensure that background surroundings do not reveal their location; (g) Courts should provide the parties, in orders setting the hearing, with a telephone number and an email address for the court, which the parties may use to inform the court if they have been unable to appear remotely for a hearing. Before dismissing or granting a petition due to the petitioner or respondent not appearing for a remote hearing, or the court not being able to reach the party via telephone or video, the court shall check for any notifications to the court regarding issues with remote access or other technological difficulties. If any party has provided such notification to the court, the court shall not dismiss or grant the petition, but shall reset the hearing by continuing it and reissuing any temporary order in place. If a party was unable to provide the notification regarding issues with remote access or other technological difficulties on the day of the hearing prior to the court's ruling, that party may seek relief via a motion for reconsideration; and (h) A party attending a hearing remotely who is unable to participate in the hearing outside the presence of others who reside with the party, but who are not part of the proceeding including, but not limited to, children, and who asserts that the presence of those individuals may hinder the party's testimony or the party's ability to fully and meaningfully participate in the hearing, may request a continuance on that basis. Such requests may be granted in the court's discretion. In considering the request, the court may consider the rebuttable presumption against delay and the purpose of this chapter to provide victims quick and effective relief. (6) If an interpreter is appointed pursuant to RCW 7.105.245(2) for any remote hearing conducted pursuant to this chapter, and if the interpreter is appearing remotely and interpreting in the simultaneous mode, then such interpretation must be recorded.

  amended

• RCW 7.105.245

  or → read as follows: (1) Pursuant to chapter 2.42 RCW, in order to ensure that parties have meaningful access to the court, an interpreter shall be appointed for any party who is deaf, hard of hearing, deaf-blind, or has a speech impairment and cannot readily understand or communicate in spoken language. Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 2.42 (a) Appoint an interpreter who is not credentialed or duly qualified by the court to provide interpretation services; or (b) Appoint a person to provide interpretation services if that person is serving as an advocate for the party. (2) Pursuant to chapter 2.43 RCW, in order to ensure that parties have meaningful access to the court, an interpreter shall be appointed for any party who has limited English proficiency. Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 2.43 RCW, the court shall not: (a) Appoint an interpreter who is not credentialed or duly qualified by the court to provide interpretation services; (b) Appoint a person to provide interpretation services if that person is serving as an advocate for the party; or (c) Require interpretation in the simultaneous mode, unless requested by the party who needs interpreter services the litigants is not compromised, or any other reasons identified by the court. (6) Courts shall make a private space available for parties, counsel, and/or court staff and interpreters to sight translate any written documents or to meet and confer. (7) When a hearing is conducted through telephone, video, or other electronic means, the court must make appropriate arrangements to permit interpreters to serve the parties and the court as needed. (8) Courts shall ensure that interpretations in the simultaneous mode occur in maximum intervals of 30 minutes. (9) The court shall ensure that a party participating in a hearing in person has meaningful access to the court by providing necessary technology and software to such party if the party is appointed an interpreter under subsection (2) of this section and the interpretation is conducted in the simultaneous mode.

  amended

• RCW 7.105.310

  or → (n) Or sential personal effects. The court sha nal effects with sufficient specificit operty is included. Personal effects ma y order that a petitioner be granted th of any pet owned, possessed, leased, ke , respondent, or minor child residing w respondent, and may prohibit the respon the petitioner's efforts to obtain the prohibit the respondent from knowingly remaining within, a specified distance o e pet is regularly found; (o) Or (p) En respondent from engaging in abusive li ter 26.51 RCW or in frivolous filings a ing harassing or libelous communicat third parties, making false repo , or engaging in abusive use of process

  amended

• RCW 7.105.450

  (b) Upon conviction, and in addition to any other penalties provided by law, the court: (i) May require that the respondent submit to electronic monitoring. The court shall specify who must provide the electronic monitoring services and the terms under which the monitoring must be performed. The order also may include a requirement that the respondent pay the costs of the monitoring. The court shall consider the ability of the convicted person to pay for electronic monitoring; and (ii) Shall impose a fine of $15, in addition to any penalty or fine imposed, for a violation of a domestic violence protection order issued under this chapter. Revenue from the $15 fine must be remitted monthly to the state treasury for deposit in the domestic violence prevention account. (2) A law enforcement officer shall arrest without a warrant and take into custody a person whom the law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe has violated a domestic violence protection order, a sexual assault protection order, a stalking protection order, or a vulnerable adult protection order, or an order issued under chapter 9A.40, 9A.44, 9A.46, 9A.88, 9.94A, 10.77, 10.99, 26.09, 26.26A, or 26.26B RCW, or a valid foreign protection order as defined in RCW 26.52.020, or a Canadian domestic violence protection order as defined in RCW 26.55.010, that restrains the person or excludes the person from a residence, workplace, school, or day care, or prohibits the person from knowingly coming within, or knowingly remaining within, a specified distance of a location, a protected party's person, or a protected party's vehicle, if the person restrained knows of the order. Presence of the order in the law enforcement computer-based criminal intelligence information system is not the only means of establishing knowledge of the order. (3)(a) A violation of a domestic violence protection order, a sexual assault protection order, a stalking protection order, or a vulnerable adult protection order, or an order issued under chapter 9A.40, 9A.44, 9A.46, 9A.88, 9.94A, 10.77, 10.99, 26.09, 26.26A, or 26.26B RCW, or a valid foreign protection order as defined in RCW 26.52.020, or a Canadian domestic violence protection order as defined in RCW 26.55.010, shall also constitute contempt of court, and is subject to the penalties prescribed by law. (b) A court, pursuant to its authority under chapter 7.21 RCW, shall initiate a contempt proceeding on its own motion when there is probable cause to believe that the respondent violated an order listed in this subsection. ( A defe nt wh for ion with olatin is bsection and n rai ent in son as an days a r the llo g the is nce of in mation. ( Upon the ling for ent off r all mes violen prote der stalkin protec der r an or grant 94A 0.77, 10 , 26.0 ote on order defi ole protect order sue order the re d s cause w in 14 und contemp of cou h in the urt o tit er or r ondent me the alle viola ( Appeara s requ nno e waived

  amended

Action History

1. March 12, 2026

   First reading, referred to Law & Justice.

Sponsors

• Bob Hasegawa · Primary

Subjects