Washington lawDuiHomicide

DUI Penalties in Washington

September 28, 2026 · LawDiver Research Team

If you only remember one point about DUI penalties in Washington, remember this: BAC limits: 0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21. A first offense: First-offense DUI is typically a gross misdemeanor with fines, possible jail, license suspension, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock requirements. Felony threshold: A third DUI within 10 years can be a felony; vehicular assault/homicide while under the influence are felonies. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.502. Lookback: Prior DUI convictions within 7 years (and 10 years for some felony tracks) enhance penalties.. Ignition interlock: Ignition interlock is required for most DUI offenders as a condition of driving privileges.

First-offense penalties

First-offense DUI is typically a gross misdemeanor with fines, possible jail, license suspension, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock requirements.

Walking through Washington facts

Use this walkthrough to see which Washington authority does the work at each step.

A driver in Washington is charged with a first impaired-driving offense and wants to know what the statute actually sets.

Start with the alcohol limits: 0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21
Read the first-offense range: First-offense DUI is typically a gross misdemeanor with fines, possible jail, license suspension, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock requirements.
Ask when the charge becomes a felony: A third DUI within 10 years can be a felony; vehicular assault/homicide while under the influence are felonies. Lookback: Prior DUI convictions within 7 years (and 10 years for some felony tracks) enhance penalties.
Interlock: Ignition interlock is required for most DUI offenders as a condition of driving privileges.

Washington DUI under RCW 46.61.502 proceeds in district or superior court with parallel DOL administrative actions. Defense reviews the stop and breath/blood foundations.

When a Washington DUI becomes a felony

A third DUI within 10 years can be a felony; vehicular assault/homicide while under the influence are felonies.

Ignition interlock and license consequences

Ignition interlock is required for most DUI offenders as a condition of driving privileges.

How a typical Washington DUI case unfolds

Washington DUI under RCW 46.61.502 proceeds in district or superior court with parallel DOL administrative actions. Defense reviews the stop and breath/blood foundations.

Case law: DUI penalties in Washington

The State of Washington, Respondent, v. George E. Franco, Appellant

The State of Washington, Respondent, v. George E. Franco, Appellant, 96 Wash. 2d 816 (1982)

…ed to the Breathalyzer and the test revealed a 0.10 percent blood alcohol content (BAC). During a trial before a jury in the Superior Court, Franco testified on direct examination that he had consumed one gin and tonic at approximately 9 p.m. at a friend's house; a mai tai and a tequila sunrise at The Broadway between 10 p.m. and 12 midnight, and two mai tais at Lion O'Reilly's…

Washington opinions such as The State of Washington, Respondent, v. George E. Franco, Appellant are cited where DUI penalties is disputed. The court stated: "Breathalyzer and the test revealed a 0.10 percent blood alcohol content (BAC). During a trial before a jury in the Superior Court, Franco testified on direct examination that he had consumed one gin and tonic at approximately 9 p.m." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.

The State of Washington v. Gregory Crediford

The State of Washington v. Gregory Crediford, 130 Wash. 2d 747 (1996)

…Gregory K. Crediford appeals his conviction on a charge of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He challenges the constitutionality of the version of the driving under the influence statute that was in effect at the time he was cited. We reverse his conviction, holding that section (3) of that statute, which effectively imposes upon a defendant the burden of dis…

Washington opinions such as The State of Washington v. Gregory Crediford are cited where DUI penalties is disputed. The court stated: "Gregory K. Crediford appeals his conviction on a charge of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He challenges the constitutionality of the version of the driving under the influence statute that was in effect at the time he was cited." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.

The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Patrick M. Curran, Appellant

The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Patrick M. Curran, Appellant, 116 Wash. 2d 174 (1991)

…as properly admitted. Effective June 11, 1986, Washington's driving under the influence statute, RCW 46.61.502, was amended. Prior to that date, a defendant was guilty per se of the crime of driving under the influence if his blood alcohol level was higher than .10 percent. Former RCW 46.61.502(1). The amendment to former RCW 46.61.502 changed this per se violation of the statu…

The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Patrick M. Curran, Appellant is worth reading on Washington DUI penalties because the court put the point in its own words: "Effective June 11, 1986, Washington's driving under the influence statute, RCW 46.61.502, was amended. Prior to that date, a defendant was guilty per se of the crime of driving under the influence if his blood alcohol level was higher than .10 percent. Former RCW 46.61.502(1)." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.

The State of Washington v. Logan C. Baldwin

The State of Washington v. Logan C. Baldwin, 109 Wash. App. 516 (2001)

…); RCW 46.61.517. Logan Baldwin was stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence. He admitted to a police officer that he had drunk one glass of wine and had taken an antidepressant— amitriptyline — the night before. When a breath test revealed he was within the legal limit for alcohol consumption, the officer decided a blood test was needed to *519determine whether a dr…

On DUI penalties, The State of Washington v. Logan C. Baldwin speaks to the Washington dispute in this passage: "RCW 46.61.517. Logan Baldwin was stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence. He admitted to a police officer that he had drunk one glass of wine and had taken an antidepressant— amitriptyline — the night before." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.

City of Seattle v. St. John

City of Seattle v. St. John, 215 P.3d 194 (2009)

…f alcohol on St. John's breath. Michl arrested St. John for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor and gave him the statutory warning regarding implied consent blood alcohol tests. St. John refused the voluntary blood alcohol test. Michl then sought a search warrant for a blood alcohol test. Seattle Municipal Court Judge Michael Hurtado found probable cause and sign…

Practitioners open City of Seattle v. St. John when Washington DUI penalties turns on the distinction in this sentence: "St. John's breath. Michl arrested St. John for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor and gave him the statutory warning regarding implied consent blood alcohol tests. St. John refused the voluntary blood alcohol test." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.

The City of Seattle v. Robert St. John — Sanders, J., dissenting

The City of Seattle v. Robert St. John — Sanders, J., dissenting, 166 Wash. 2d 941 (2009)

…nequivocal provisions of the statutes governing testing for driving under the influence as outlined above require [ ] that no test should have been given to Mr. St. John. Though the statutes authorize seeking a search warrant (RCW 46.20.308(1)[)] and competent evidence need not be excluded (RCW 46.61.506(2)0], they do not mandate that the evidence should be admitted into eviden…

Practitioners open The City of Seattle v. Robert St. John — Sanders, J., dissenting when Washington DUI penalties turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Mr. St. John. Though the statutes authorize seeking a search warrant (RCW 46.20.308(1)[)] and competent evidence need not be excluded (RCW 46.61." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.

Key takeaways

BAC limits: 0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21
Lookback period: Prior DUI convictions within 7 years (and 10 years for some felony tracks) enhance penalties.
First-offense range: First-offense DUI is typically a gross misdemeanor with fines, possible jail, license suspension, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock requirements.
Felony threshold: A third DUI within 10 years can be a felony; vehicular assault/homicide while under the influence are felonies.
Ignition interlock: Ignition interlock is required for most DUI offenders as a condition of driving privileges.
Primary authority: Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.502.

Blood alcohol limits in Washington

0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21

Lookback window for prior offenses

Prior DUI convictions within 7 years (and 10 years for some felony tracks) enhance penalties.

Frequently asked questions

What is the legal BAC limit in Washington?