Washington Code 9.94A.740 – Community custody violators — Arrest, detention, financial responsibility
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
(1) When an offender is arrested pursuant to RCW 9.94A.631 or 9.94A.716, the department shall compensate the local jurisdiction at the office of financial management’s adjudicated rate, in accordance with RCW 70.48.440, until the department releases its detainer.
Terms Used In Washington Code 9.94A.740
- Contract: A legal written agreement that becomes binding when signed.
- Jurisdiction: (1) The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two courts have simultaneous responsibility for the same case. (2) The geographic area over which the court has authority to decide cases.
(2) Inmates, as defined in RCW 72.09.015, who have been transferred to community custody and who are detained in a local correctional facility are the financial responsibility of the department of corrections, except as provided in subsection (3) of this section.
(3) For confinement sanctions imposed by the department under RCW 9.94A.670, the local correctional facility shall be financially responsible.
(4) The department, in consultation with the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs and those counties in which the sheriff does not operate a correctional facility, shall establish a methodology for determining the department’s local correctional facilities bed utilization rate, for each county in calendar year 1998, for offenders being held for violations of conditions of community custody.
(5) Except as provided in subsections (1) and (2) of this section, the local correctional facility shall continue to be financially responsible to the extent of the calendar year 1998 bed utilization rate for confinement sanctions imposed by the department pursuant to RCW 9.94A.737. If the department’s use of bed space in local correctional facilities of any county for such confinement sanctions exceeds the 1998 bed utilization rate for the county, the department shall compensate the county for the excess use at the per diem rate equal to the lowest rate charged by the county under its contract with a municipal government during the year in which the use occurs.
[ 2012 1st sp.s. c 6 § 8; 2008 c 231 § 22; 1999 c 196 § 9; 1996 c 275 § 4; 1988 c 153 § 5. Formerly RCW 9.94A.207.]
NOTES:
Effective date—2012 1st sp.s. c 6 §§ 1, 3 through 9, and 11 through 14: See note following RCW 9.94A.631.
Application—2012 1st sp.s. c 6: See note following RCW 9.94A.631.
Intent—Application—Application of repealers—Effective date—2008 c 231: See notes following RCW 9.94A.701.
Severability—2008 c 231: See note following RCW 9.94A.500.
Severability—1999 c 196: See note following RCW 9.94A.010.
Finding—1996 c 275: See note following RCW 9.94A.505.
Application—1996 c 275 §§ 1-5: See note following RCW 9.94A.505.
Effective date—Application of increased sanctions—1988 c 153: See notes following RCW 9.94A.030.