In Washington, fraud and theft are not two separate crimes. Deception is one of three ways the theft statute says a person can commit theft, so a business dispute, a disputed invoice, or a misstatement on an application can all be charged as theft. Forgery and identity theft exist as their own offenses, but there is no catchall fraud charge. A Seattle white collar crime attorney at Jennifer Horwitz Law can help you understand which theory applies and where the State’s proof is weakest.
How Washington Charges Deception Instead of Fraud
Search the Washington criminal code for a single offense called fraud and you will not find one. What you will find is a theft statute that treats deception as one of the ways theft happens. Under state law, theft includes obtaining someone else’s property or services through deception with the intent to deprive them of it. That is the prong prosecutors reach for when the allegation involves a lie rather than a physical taking.
Washington does define several specific offenses that people commonly describe as fraud. Each has its own elements, and each is charged separately from theft:
- Forgery under RCW 9A.60.020, which covers falsely making, completing, or altering a written instrument, or possessing, uttering, offering, or passing off as true an instrument you know is forged, with intent to injure or defraud. Forgery is a class C felony.
- Obtaining a signature by deception or duress under RCW 9A.60.030, which applies when someone uses deception or duress, with intent to defraud or deprive, to cause another person to sign or execute a written instrument. This is also a class C felony.
- Identity theft under RCW 9.35.020, which covers knowingly obtaining, possessing, using, or transferring another person’s identifying or financial information with intent to commit or aid any crime.
These offenses can be charged alongside a theft count arising from the same events. That is one reason a single accusation can generate several charges at once, and why the total exposure on paper often looks far larger than the underlying loss.
What the Value of the Property Decides
Once the State settles on a theft theory, the degree turns almost entirely on value. Washington sets three tiers, and the dividing lines are specific dollar figures rather than a judgment call about how serious the conduct feels.
The tiers work as follows:
- Theft in the first degree covers property or services exceeding five thousand dollars in value, along with certain property taken directly from another person. It is a class B felony.
- Theft in the second degree covers property or services exceeding seven hundred fifty dollars but not exceeding five thousand dollars. It also covers access devices such as credit card numbers, regardless of amount. It is a class C felony.
- Theft in the third degree covers property or services not exceeding seven hundred fifty dollars. It is a gross misdemeanor.
Those classifications carry statutory maximums. A class B felony carries a maximum of ten years and a twenty thousand dollar fine. A class C felony carries a maximum of five years and a ten thousand dollar fine. A gross misdemeanor carries up to three hundred sixty-four days in county jail and a five thousand dollar fine.
These sentences are ceilings, not predictions. Actual felony sentences are calculated under Washington’s Sentencing Reform Act using the offense seriousness level and the person’s criminal history, so most first-time cases land well below the statutory maximum.
Identity theft follows its own value line. Obtaining more than fifteen hundred dollars in credit, money, goods, or services, or knowingly targeting a senior or vulnerable individual, makes it identity theft in the first degree, a class B felony. Everything else falls into the second degree, a class C felony.
Why a Deception Case Can Be Charged Years Later
This is the difference that matters most and the one almost no article mentions. Washington gives prosecutors a longer window when theft is accomplished through deception.
Ordinary felony theft generally must be charged within three years of the act. But theft in the first or second degree accomplished by color or aid of deception falls under a separate provision. That gives the State six years from the date of the offense or the date it was discovered, whichever comes later. Felony identity theft carries the same six-year discovery rule. Gross misdemeanors, including third degree theft, must be charged within two years.
The practical effect is significant. A deception allegation that surfaces during an audit five years after the fact may still be timely, because the clock can run from discovery rather than from the conduct. If you have been contacted about a transaction you assumed was long closed, the age of the events alone does not mean the case is barred.
What Prosecutors Must Actually Prove
The State does not get a conviction simply by showing that something you said turned out to be untrue. The statute requires more, and the definitions are narrower than most people expect.
A deception theft case requires proof of each of the following:
- Deception in the statutory sense, meaning the person knowingly created or confirmed a false impression, failed to correct an impression they had already created or confirmed, prevented someone from acquiring information material to the disposition of the property, transferred or encumbered property without disclosing a lien or adverse claim, or promised performance they did not intend to perform or knew would not be performed.
- That the deception operated to bring about the obtaining of the property or services. It does not have to be the only method used, but it does have to have worked.
- Intent to deprive the owner of the property or services. A failed business venture, a disputed invoice, or an optimistic projection that did not pan out is not the same as intent.
Washington also provides a specific defense worth knowing. It is a sufficient defense to theft that the property was appropriated openly and avowedly under a claim of title made in good faith, even if that claim ultimately turns out to be untenable. The defense has two parts. The appropriation must have been open and avowed rather than concealed, and the belief in your own claim must have been honest. If both are true, you do not have to be right about the underlying ownership question.
Intent is where these cases are usually won or lost. Emails, contracts, accounting records, and text messages tend to cut both ways, and the same document that looks damning in a summary can look ordinary in context.
Talk With Jennifer Before You Explain Yourself
If a detective, an investigator, or a former business partner has raised a fraud or theft accusation, the most valuable thing you can do is get advice before you give an account of what happened. Jennifer Horwitz offers in-depth one-hour paid consultations through the Consultation Station, where you can review the allegation and your options directly with her.