What Constitutes a Willful Violation of a No-Contact Order in Washington?

If you’ve been arrested for domestic violence in Tacoma or Pierce County, a no contact order is likely one of the first things the court imposes—sometimes even before charges are filed. These orders are meant to protect alleged victims, but they can have serious consequences for the accused, especially if you share a home, workplace, or a child with the protected party.

In Washington, the courts will often issue no-contact orders in domestic violence cases. If a person subject to a no-contact order subsequently violates its terms, they may be charged with additional crimes.

At Smith & White, PLLC, we’ve helped hundreds of clients understand and respond to these orders, particularly when they interfere with parenting, housing, or everyday life. This article explains how no contact orders work in Washington, how prosecutors prove violations, and how defense attorneys can challenge the process—including when alcohol or unclear communication is involved.

What Counts as a Willful Violation?

In Washington, violating a no contact order must be “willful” to result in a criminal charge. But what exactly does that mean?

According to Washington courts, willfulness includes acting “knowingly”—you do not need to act maliciously or with intent to harm.

Hypothetical Case: Unintentional Contact Leads to Arrest

Imagine a man under a no contact order runs into the protected person at a funeral home. The two sit near each other outside, and a third party calls the police. When officers arrive, they note that the defendant is not making direct contact but is within prohibited distance.

The defendant is charged with a felony violation. He argues that the meeting was unplanned and not willful.

The court rules:

The defendant knew the order’s terms.
He signed the order and had prior violations.
Sitting nearby and not leaving showed conscious disregard.

The jury convicts. On appeal, the court affirms, stating that the charging document correctly used “knowingly,” which satisfied the legal definition of “willful” in this context.

Can Voluntary Intoxication Be a Defense?

In most cases, no. While intoxication can affect mental state, Washington courts rarely allow voluntary intoxication as a defense unless it clearly interfered with the specific intent required for a crime.

Case Example: No Defense for Drunken Violation

In another Washington case, a man with a history of alcohol-related violence was under a no contact order. He moved onto his father’s property, where the protected person also lived. One night, while drunk, he entered her home, demanded she leave, and threatened her.

Police arrested him for violating the order and for residential burglary.

On appeal, he argued that his lawyer failed to pursue a voluntary intoxication defense.

The court disagreed, noting that:

The crimes required specific mental states (intent, knowledge).
While he had been drinking, he provided no evidence that the alcohol impaired his ability to form intent.
His behavior showed deliberate action, not confusion or incapacity.

The court upheld the conviction and ruled that his attorney had not been ineffective.

What if the Victim Initiated Contact?

It doesn’t matter. In Washington, no contact orders are court orders—not mutual agreements. Even if the protected person calls, texts, or invites the defendant to meet, the defendant can still be charged for responding or appearing.

In fact, prosecutors often pursue charges in cases where:

The victim initiated the contact.
The interaction appeared consensual.
The order was not formally modified by the court.

If you’re in this situation, do not engage. Contact your attorney instead. We can file a motion to modify the order, or help you respond safely and legally.

How We Can Help: Strategy and Advocacy

At Smith & White, our Tacoma domestic violence defense attorneys regularly handle cases involving:

First-time no contact order violations.
Felony violations with domestic violence aggravators.
Alleged co-parenting interference.
Claims of unintentional or unavoidable contact.
Violations tied to alcohol or drug use.

We analyze every detail:

Was the contact truly willful?
Did the officer misunderstand the scene?
Was the order clearly communicated and signed?
Was the contact part of parenting or a misunderstanding?

We also work to reduce or lift no contact orders where appropriate—especially when children are involved or when long-term terms are disproportionate.

Example 2: Challenging Evidence

As discussed in a recent Washington domestic violence case, the State must offer sufficient evidence to support convictions for violating no-contact orders, and if they do not, the conviction can be challenged. If you are accused of a domestic violence offense, it is wise to speak to a Tacoma domestic violence attorney about your options.

It is reported that the defendant was initially charged with domestic violence crimes after the victim called 911 twice, reporting that the defendant was threatening to come to her apartment. Following this, a pretrial no-contact order was imposed on the defendant. Despite the no-contact order, the defendant called the victim multiple times from jail. After the original charges were dismissed, the State filed new charges against the defendant for witness tampering and violating the pretrial no-contact order.

The defendant was found guilty of multiple charges, including numerous counts of witness tampering, violating a domestic violence no-contact order, and attempted violation of a no-contact order. The defendant challenged his conviction, raising several issues, including the sufficiency of the evidence for violating the no-contact order, the admission of hearsay statements, the denial of his request for a mental health sentencing alternative, and the imposition of a victim penalty assessment.

Evidence Sufficient to Support Convictions for Violating No-Contact Orders

After reviewing the defendant’s claims, the court upheld the trial court’s rulings. Specifically, the court found sufficient evidence to support the convictions for violating the no-contact order, as the order was not invalidated but recalled when the underlying charges were dismissed. The court also determined that the validity of the no-contact order was not an essential element of the crime.

Regarding the admission of the 911 calls, the court agreed with the trial court that the calls qualified as excited utterances and were, therefore, admissible under the hearsay exception. The court found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in this evidentiary decision.

Moreover, regarding the denial of the mental health sentencing alternative, the appellate court found that the trial court did not err in its decision. The trial court had considered the defendant’s mental health conditions but found that he did not demonstrate a sufficient connection between his conditions and the crimes.

Furthermore, the court found that the defendant had ample opportunities for treatment in the past and that his request for a mental health sentencing alternative did not align with the intent of the Sentencing Reform Act.

One of the factors in denying defendant’s request for a mental health treatment alternative was his unwillingness to treat. If his defense attorney had encouraged him to entered mental health treatment BEFORE the sentencing then many of the court’s reasons for NOT granting the alternative would have been removed or reduced. The attorneys at Smith & White, PLLC could have put this defendant in a much better position to succeed.

Facing a No Contact Order Violation in Washington? Let’s Talk.

If you’re charged with violating a no contact order in a domestic violence case—or if you’re trying to modify an order that affects your parenting—you don’t have to navigate this alone. The penalties are serious, but you have legal options.

Facing domestic violence allegations or no contact order violations in Tacoma, WA? Reach out to our Tacoma office today for a free consultation.