Ordinance 1692-90 - Laserfiche WebLink

1 conceals the child, with the intent to deny access, from the other parent having the lawful right to time with the 2 child pursuant to a court-ordered parenting plan; or 2) the parent has not complied with the residential provisions of 3 a court-ordered parenting plan after a finding of contempt under RCW 26.09.160(3) ; or 3) if the court finds that the 4 parent has engaged in a pattern of willful violations of the court-ordered residential provisions. 5 C. Nothing in 6.2. of this section prohibits conviction of 6 Custodial Interference under 6.1 . or 6.3. of this section in absence of findings of contempt. 7 D. Custodial Interference is a Gross Misdemeanor. 8 E. Any reasonable expenses incurred in locating or returning a 9 child or incompetent person shall be assessed against a defendant convicted of custodial interference. 10 F. In any prosecution of Custodial Interference, it is a 11 complete defense, if established by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence, that: 1 ) the defendant's 12 purpose was to protect the child, incompetent person, or himself or herself from imminent physical harm, that the 13 belief in the existence of the imminent physical harm was reasonable, and that the defendant sought the assistance of 14 the police, sheriff's office, protective agencies, or the court of any state before committing the acts giving rise 15 to the charges or within a reasonable time thereafter; 2) the complainant had, prior to the defendant committing the 16 acts giving rise to the crime, for a protracted period of time, failed to exercise his or her rights to physical 17 custody or access to the child under a court-ordered parenting plan or order granting visitation rights, 18 provided that such failure was not the direct result of the defendant's denial of access to such person; 3) the acts 19 giving rise to the charges were consented to by the complainant; or 4) the offender, after providing or making 20 a good faith effort to provide notice to the person entitled to access to the child, failed to provide access 21 to the child due to reasons that a reasonable would believe were directly related to the welfare of the child, and 22 allowed access to the child in accordance with the court order within a reasonable period of time. The burden of 23 proof that the denial of access was reasonable is upon the person denying access to the child. 24 G. Consent of a child less than sixteen (16) years of age or 25 of an incompetent person does not constitute a defense to Custodial Interference. 26 27 Section 2: Savings. 28 The enactments of this ordinance shall not affect any case, proceeding, 29 appeal or other matter currently pending in any court or in any way modify 30 any right or liability, civil or criminal , which may be in existence on the 31 effective date of this ordinance. 32 2