SB 6249
In CommitteeSenate
Stalking/DOC supervision
Concerning department of corrections supervision of individuals convicted of stalking.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill requires the Department of Corrections (DOC) to supervise individuals convicted of stalking, regardless of whether the conviction is for a felony or misdemeanor. It also updates rules about which other offenders must be supervised by DOC, including those with certain sex, domestic violence, or serious violent offenses.
- Requires the Department of Corrections (DOC) to supervise individuals convicted of stalking (RCW 9A.46.110) during their community custody or probation period.
- Expands mandatory DOC supervision to include individuals convicted of misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor stalking (not just felonies).
- Adds stalking to the list of offenses that automatically trigger DOC supervision, regardless of risk assessment or sentence length.
- Clarifies that DOC supervision for stalking and other specified offenses must continue for the full duration of the court-ordered community custody period, unless reduced by earned credits.
- Prohibits DOC from supervising anyone unless the person falls under one of the specific categories listed in the law.
Who is affected
- People convicted of stalking — People convicted of stalking (RCW 9A.46.110) will now be required to be supervised by the Department of Corrections (DOC) during their community custody or probation period.
- People convicted of certain sex, domestic violence, or serious violent offenses — People convicted of certain sex offenses, domestic violence offenses, or other serious crimes will be subject to mandatory DOC supervision under updated rules.
- People released by the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board — People released from prison on indeterminate sentences (e.g., life sentences with parole eligibility) will be supervised by DOC if they are subject to community custody.
- Courts and probation officers — Courts and probation officers will need to ensure that individuals convicted of stalking are referred to DOC for supervision rather than local probation oversight.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
By requiring DOC supervision for *all* stalking convictions—including misdemeanors—the bill ensures consistent oversight of a high-risk behavior pattern, which is associated with escalation to physical violence and homicide; this benefits victims and communities by standardizing accountability.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) (mandating DOC supervision for stalking convictions regardless of level)The bill strengthens protections for stalking victims by ensuring that even low-level convictions are subject to court-ordered supervision and conditions (e.g., no-contact orders, location monitoring), reducing opportunities for repeat offenses and increasing victim safety.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (2) (community custody for misdemeanor/gross misdemeanor stalking)Allowing earned supervision compliance credits incentivizes positive behavior and successful completion of supervision, supporting rehabilitation and reducing recidivism—benefiting both supervisees and the public.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (11) (supervision duration may be reduced by earned credits)Clarifying mandatory DOC supervision for domestic violence and sex offenses—especially repetitive or serious cases—enhances consistency in monitoring high-risk offenders and fills gaps where local supervision may have been inconsistent or under-resourced.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (1) (expansion to include domestic violence and sex offenses)The explicit limitation on DOC supervision to statutorily defined categories reduces arbitrary or overbroad supervision, promoting fairness and preventing mission creep—benefiting local agencies and supervisees alike.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (8) (DOC may only supervise those explicitly listed)
Potential Concerns (5)
Mandatory DOC supervision for all stalking convictions—including misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors—may improve public safety by ensuring consistent monitoring of individuals convicted of stalking, potentially reducing repeat offenses and enhancing victim protection.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) (adding RCW 9A.46.110 stalking to mandatory DOC supervision)Expanding DOC supervision to lower-level stalking convictions may increase surveillance and restrictions on personal liberty for individuals convicted of non-felony stalking, potentially leading to disproportionate impacts on low-income and marginalized individuals who lack resources to navigate complex supervision requirements.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (2) (expanding DOC supervision to misdemeanor/gross misdemeanor stalking and requiring community custody)The bill may increase state costs for DOC supervision of stalking offenders, including staffing, electronic monitoring, and case management, which could divert funds from other public safety or social services—potentially affecting service quality for all Washingtonians over time.
FinancialPeopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and fiscal impact noteShifting supervision of stalking offenders from local probation to DOC may reduce local court and probation officer workload, but could strain county-level coordination and create administrative friction between local and state systems.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (6) (DOC supervision of indeterminate sentence releasees)Mandatory supervision for the full court-ordered period—without discretion to shorten based on low risk—may prolong restrictions on freedom for individuals whose stalking behavior was non-repetitive, non-threatening, or occurred in contexts like workplace or digital harassment with minimal physical threat.
Rights & LibertiesLean peopleRef: Sec. 1, new subsection (7) and subsection (10) (supervision duration tied to community custody period)
Who Is Most Affected
People convicted of stalking—especially for misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offenses—will now be subject to state-level supervision (DOC), which may increase accountability and reduce reoffending, but also impose financial, employment, and liberty constraints (e.g., drug testing, curfews, GPS monitoring).
Victims of stalking benefit from more consistent monitoring and enforcement of no-contact orders, increasing perceived and actual safety; however, the bill does not directly fund victim services, so benefits are indirect.
Local probation departments may see reduced caseloads for stalking cases, but may face coordination challenges with DOC; DOC will incur new costs for staffing and monitoring, potentially straining state resources.
Low-income individuals convicted of stalking (especially for non-physical forms like online harassment) may face disproportionate hardship due to supervision costs (e.g., monitoring fees, drug tests), potentially leading to deeper entanglement in the justice system.
Law enforcement and prosecutors gain a stronger tool for enforcing stalking protections across all conviction levels, but may face increased administrative burden in ensuring proper referral to DOC.