Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

RCW 4.44.210

Peremptory challenges, how taken.

Applied in 5 court decisions — leading case State v. Williamson (2000)

Most recently applied in Portch v. Sommerville (October 2002)

2003 c 406 s 9; Code 1881 s 215; 1877 p 45 s 219; 1869 p 53 s 219; RRS s 333.

How often courts cite this section

198019902000200220
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

The jurors having been examined as to their qualifications, first by the plaintiff and then by the defendant, and passed for cause, the peremptory challenges shall be conducted as follows, to wit:

The plaintiff may challenge one, and then the defendant may challenge one, and so alternately until the peremptory challenges shall be exhausted. During this alternating process, if one of the parties declines to exercise a peremptory challenge, then that party may no longer peremptorily challenge any of the jurors in the group for which challenges are then being considered and may only peremptorily challenge any jurors later added to that group. A refusal to challenge by either party in the said order of alternation shall not prevent the adverse party from using the full number of challenges.

Official source: Washington State Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Washington statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.