The Supreme Court adopted JuCR 7.16 in February of 2021 limiting the issuance of warrants in juvenile matters to instances when the juvenile posed a serious threat to public safety. Three years later Division III of the COA found the rule to be unenforceable and removed the restriction. At the urging of appellate and Amicus attorneys from King County DPD and OPD[1], six members of the Washington Supreme Court reversed the COA and upheld the restriction on issuing warrants for juveniles to cases where a juvenile’s behaviors posed a serious threat to public safety as stated in JuCR 7.16.

The case involved a 13-year-old middle school girl who plead guilty to fourth degree assault and was placed under community supervision with several conditions, including abstaining from alcohol. Not surprisingly over several months, she repeatedly violated the conditions, by using alcohol, failing to report to her probation officer, and leaving her home. Her probation officer sought multiple bench warrants, arguing that her actions, including a suicide attempt while intoxicated, posed a serious threat to public safety a necessary predicate before issuing a warrant under the juvenile court rule. The juvenile court issued a bench warrant, finding that her conduct met the serious threat to public safety standard required by a court rule, JuCR 7.16.

Her attorney Andrea Crumpler then a public defender with Spokane County filed an appeal arguing that A.M.W.’s actions did not meet JuCR 7.16’s serious threat to public safety requirement.  The Washington Court of Appeals Div III agreed that the facts found by the trial court did not meet JuCR 7.16’s serious threat to public safety requirement, as the connection between her actions and a threat to public safety was too attenuated. However, the appellate court then surprisingly held that JuCR 7.16 irreconcilably conflicted with RCW 13.40.040, a statute with less restrictive prerequisites for issuing juvenile arrest warrants. In a split decision the majority concluded that JuCR 7.16 was substantive, not procedural, and therefore invalid because it conflicted with the legislature’s authority over substantive law. In dissent Judge Fearing disagreed, viewing the rule as procedural and noting the well documented disproportionate effect of warrants on minority youth.

On Thursday (8/14/25) the Washington Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and held that JuCR 7.16 is a procedural rule governing the issuance of warrants and falls within the court’s inherent, constitutional, and statutory authority. The court further held that JuCR 7.16 and RCW 13.40.040 can be harmonized, requiring juvenile courts to satisfy both sets of prerequisites before issuing a warrant. The court also clarified that serious threat to public safety under JuCR 7.16 does not include threats to the juvenile’s own safety. Justice Yu’s concurring opinion noted the inherent harm of detention to youth and the disproportionate use of detention for minority youth. 

The juvenile court judge in A.M.W. was faced with overwhelming allegations of potentially self-harmful behavior including drinking, running away, suicide attempts, skipping school, refusing to follow home rules and sexual activity among others.  While the trial court found that these behaviors constituted a serious threat to public safety, neither the Court of Appeals nor the State believed that those behaviors met the requirement. In fact, the State conceded in their argument that the behaviors alleged did not pose a serious threat to public safety. 

So, whether the rule is substantive or procedural, an issue never argued in the trial courts, the rule must be followed and before a warrant can be issued for a failure to appear or violation of a condition of release or probation, there must be a finding that the youth’s violation[s] poses a serious threat to public safety!  

[1] Due to statutory restrictions the names of Travis Stearns and others at OPD do not appear on the amicus brief.  Our work was submitted with the willing cooperation of Assistant Attorney General, Marsha Chien to whom we are very grateful!