HomeMy WebLinkAboutCoroner Contract
CORONER — COUNTIES — APPOINTMENT — PROSECUTING ATTORNEY —
STATUTORY AUTHORITY — Eligibility Of County Prosecuting Attorneys To Be
Appointed County Coroner After January 1, 2025
RCW 36.16.030 currently requires that county prosecutors in counties with populations of
less than 40,000 perform the services of coroner, but effective January 1, 2025, that statute
will no longer so require. After January 1, 2025, general statutory prohibitions on coroners
practicing law will preclude county prosecuting attorneys from acting as both coroner and
prosecutor.
August 22, 2024
The Honorable Amy Vira
San Juan County Prosecuting Attorney
350 Court Street
Friday Harbor, WA 98205
The Honorable Dolly Hunt
Pend Oreille County Prosecuting Attorney
229 S Garden Avenue
Newport, WA 99156-5070
Cite As:
AGO 2024 No. 03
C. Dale Slack
Columbia County Prosecuting Attorney
215 E Clay Street
Dayton, WA 99328
Dear Prosecutors Vira, Hunt, and Slack:
By letter previously acknowledged, you have requested our opinion on the following
question:
May a county legislative authority for a county with a population of less than 40,000
appoint the prosecuting attorney to perform the services of the county coroner after
January 1, 2025, the effective date of the 2021 amendments to RCW 36.16.030?
BRIEF ANSWER
No. As of January 1, 2025, the prosecuting attorney in a county with a population of less
than 40,000 will no longer be statutorily required to act as coroner. In the absence of that statutory
requirement, statutory prohibitions on coroners practicing law, contained in RCW 36.24.170
and RCW 2.48.200, would preclude the prosecuting attorney from acting as both coroner and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
The Honorables Vira, Hunt, and Slack 2 AGO 2024 No. 3
prosecutor after January 1, 2025. Our conclusion is further supported by the legislative history of
recent statutory amendments, which indicates that the legislature intended to separate roles
of prosecuting attorney and coroner.
BACKGROUND
Your request focuses on the legislature’s 2021 amendments to RCW 36.16.030, a statute
enumerating the elective county officers in Washington. The 2021 amendments removed the
requirement that the prosecuting attorney act as coroner in counties with populat ions of less than
40,000 people. Although we believe that two other statutes, RCW 36.24.170 and RCW 2.48.200,
resolve your question, we provide a brief overview of the 2021 amendments for context. Laws of
2021, ch. 127, §§ 4, 9.
Since approximately 1925, the prosecuting attorney has been ex officio1 coroner in counties
with populations of less than 40,000 people. RCW 36.16.030; Laws of 1925, 1st Ex. Sess, ch. 148,
§ 2. RCW 36.16.030 currently states:
[I]n every county there shall be elected from among the qualified voters of the
county a county assessor, a county auditor, a county clerk, a county coroner, three
county commissioners, a county prosecuting attorney, a county sheriff, and a
county treasurer, except that in each county with a population of less than forty
thousand no coroner shall be elected and the prosecuting attorney shall be ex
officio coroner.
(Emphasis added.)
In 2021, the legislature passed Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1326, 67th Leg., Reg. Sess.
(Wash. 2021), which adopted a variety of provisions relating to coroners and medical examiners.
Laws of 2021, ch. 127. Of particular relevance here, the legislature amended RCW 36.16.030 to
provide an expiration date for the current requirements relating to county coroners and to provide
new requirements effective January 1, 2025. Laws of 2021, ch. 127, §§ 4, 5, 9, 10. Beginning
January 1, 2025, in counties with populations of less than 40,000, the coroner will either be elected
or be appointed by the county legislative authority. Laws of 2021, ch. 127, §§ 4, 9. Specifically,
effective January 1, 2025, RCW 36.16.030, in relevant part, will read:
[I]n every county there shall be elected from among the qualified voters of the
county a county assessor, a county auditor, a county clerk, a county coroner, three
county commissioners, a county prosecuting attorney, a county sheriff, and a
county treasurer, except that in each county with a population of less than forty
thousand the county legislative authority may determine that no coroner shall be
elected and instead appoint a coroner.
1 Ex officio means “[b]y virtue or because of an office.” Ex officio, Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
The Honorables Vira, Hunt, and Slack 3 AGO 2024 No. 3
Laws of 2021, ch. 127, §§ 4, 9 (emphasis added). RCW 36.16.030 does not address whom the
county may appoint as county coroner.
ANALYSIS
You asked whether a county legislative authority in a county with a population less than
40,000 may appoint the prosecuting attorney to perform the services of the county coroner after
January 1, 2025. Your question calls for our construction of RCW 36.16.030 and the statutes
governing county coroners, found in RCW 36.24. Based on RCW 36.16.030 and RCW 36.24.170,
we conclude that in a county with a population of less than 40,000, a prosecuting attorney may not
act as coroner after January 1, 2025. In the absence of the statutory requirement for the prosecuting
attorney to act as coroner, statutory prohibitions on coroners practicing law would preclude
the prosecuting attorney from performing both roles. Our conclusion is further supported by the
legislative history of the 2021 amendments.
We begin the inquiry by considering what the legislature intended when it amended
RCW 36.16.030 to remove the requirement that prosecuting attorneys act as ex officio coroners in
counties with populations of less than 40,000. The goal of statutory interpretation is to determine
and give effect to the legislature’s intent. Wash. State Ass’n of Cntys. v. State, 199 Wn.2d 1, 10,
502 P.3d 825 (2022). To do so, we start with the plain language of the text, considering the
context of the statutes or provisions at issue, amendments to the provisions, related provisions, and
the overall statutory scheme. State ex rel. Banks v. Drummond, 187 Wn.2d 157, 170, 385 P.3d
769 (2016).
RCW 36.16.030 (effective January 1, 2025) does not address whether the county legislative
authority in a county with a population of less than 40,000 may appoint the prosecuting attorney
to continue to perform the duties of coroner. Because the plain language of that statute does not
address your question, we consider related statutes to help resolve the question. See Drummond,
187 Wn.2d at 170.
RCW 36.24.170 2 prohibits coroners from practicing law. RCW 36.24.170 provides: “The
coroner shall not appear or practice as attorney in any court, except in defense of himself or herself
or his or her deputies.” RCW 2.48.200 also prohibits coroners from practicing law, stating that
“[n]o person shall practice law who holds a commission as judge in any court of record, or as
sheriff or coroner . . .”. We presume that the legislature does not intend to create inconsistent
statutes, and so we seek to interpret statutes harmoniously. Associated Gen. Contractors of
Wash. v. State, 544 P.3d 486, 496 (Wash. 2024). Accordingly, we strive to interpret
RCW 36.16.030 in harmony with RCW 36.24.170 and RCW 2.48.200.
2 The prohibition on coroners practicing law was originally codified in the same statute as the prohibition on
sheriffs practicing law. Laws of 1854, § 5, at 434 (“No sheriff, deputy sheriff, or coroner, shall appear or practice as
attorney in any court, except in defen[s]e of themselves or their deputies; and either of said officers, for a violation of
this section, shall forfeit a sum not exceeding fifty dollars.”). Coroners and sheriffs were later separated into two
statutes. See RCW 36.24.170; see also RCW 36.28.110 (providing “[n]o sheriff shall appear or practice as attorney in
any court”).
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
The Honorables Vira, Hunt, and Slack 4 AGO 2024 No. 3
In 1976, our office opined that RCW 36.24.170 does not prohibit the prosecuting attorney
in a county with a population of less than 40,000 3 from performing the duties of coroner.
AGLO 1976 No. 30. In reaching our conclusion, we relied on RCW 36.16.030’s requirement that
the prosecuting attorney perform the coroner’s duties in a county with a population of less than
40,000. AGLO 1976 No. 30, at 2-3. Under RCW 36.16.030, one of the prosecuting attorney’s
statutory duties was to act as coroner. AGLO 1976 No. 30, at 2-3. But, as previously explained,
the legislature has since amended RCW 36.16.030 (effective January 1, 2025) to remove the
requirement that prosecuting attorneys in counties with less than 40,000 people act as coroner.
Laws of 2021, ch. 127, §§ 4, 9. As a result, because the basis of our earlier opinion has changed,
our interpretation of RCW 36.24.170 has also changed.
Interpreting RCW 36.16.030 (effective January 1, 2025) to allow a county to appoint a
prosecuting attorney to act as coroner would conflict with the statutory prohibitions on a coroner
practicing law. Without the express statutory requirement for the prosecuting attorney to act as
coroner, the plain language of RCW 36.24.170 and RCW 2.48.200 would preclude the prosecuting
attorney from acting as both prosecuting attorney and coroner. See State v. Twitchell, 61 Wn.2d
403, 406-07, 378 P.2d 444 (1963) (noting that a deputy prosecutor would be disqualified from
practicing law if they accepted a commission as deputy sheriff under RCW 36.28.110 and
RCW 2.48.200).
Our conclusion is also supported by the legislative history behind the 2021 amendments.
The sequential versions of the bill, amendments, and testimony demonstrate the legislature’s intent
to separate the roles of prosecuting attorney and coroner, and to withdraw its authorization for the
prosecuting attorney to perform the coroner’s duties. The original bill proposed that all counties
elect their coroner, which would separate the prosecuting attorney and the coroner. H.B. 1326,
67th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2021) (as introduced).4 Then, the House passed a substitute bill,
which authorized the county legislative authority of counties with populations of less than 40,000
to “determine that no coroner shall be elected and instead appoint a coroner or direct the
prosecuting attorney [to] serve as ex-officio coroner.” Engrossed Substitute H.B. 1326, 67th Leg.,
Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2021). Once in the Senate, Senator Kuderer introduced and the Senate adopted
an amendment to “[r]emove[] the option for the prosecuting attorney to serve as ex-officio
coroner.”5 1326-S.E AMS HLG S2197.1, https://app.leg.wa.gov/committeeschedules/Home/
Document/233341#toolbar=0&navpanes=0 (Engrossed Substitute H.B. 1326, as amended by the
3 AGLO 1976 No. 30 refers to fourth class counties. In 1976, fourth class counties were counties with a
population of less than 40,000 people. Former RCW 36.13.010, repealed by Laws of 1991, ch. 363, § 163.
4 See Hr’g on H.B. 1326 Before the Sen. Housing and Local Gov’t Comm., 67th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wash.
Mar. 16, 2021), at 29:24 to 29:52, video recording by TVW, Washington State’s Public Affairs Network,
https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2021031300 (bill sponsor Representative Lekanoff
noting that removing prosecuting attorneys from the role of coroner was one of the primary goals of the legislation).
5 See Hr’g on H.B. 1326 Before the Sen. Housing and Local Gov’t Comm., 67th Leg., Reg. Sess.
(Wash. Mar. 23, 2021), at 05:36, video recording by TVW, Washington State’s Public Affairs Network,
https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2021031490 (statement of Senator Kuderer).
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
The Honorables Vira, Hunt, and Slack 5 AGO 2024 No. 3
Senate). Senator Kuderer testified that “one of the reasons that the committee striking amendment
was adopted, because that amendment removes the ability of a county to appoint a prosecuting
attorney to act in the capacity of a coroner and that is because there is a direct conflict of interest
in that.” Sen. Floor Deb. on Substitute H.B. 1326, 67th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wash. Apr. 3, 2021), at
32:05, video recording by TVW, Washington State’s Public Affairs Network,
https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2021041040. Although “[o]ne
legislator’s comments from the floor ordinarily are not determinative of legislative intent,” courts
presume that legislators understand the meaning of the amendments that they propose. Nelson v.
P.S.C., Inc., 2 Wn.3d 227, 241, 535 P.3d 418 (2023) (citing Duke v. Boyd, 133 Wn.2d 80, 87,
942 P.2d 351 (1997)). Interpreting RCW 36.16.030 as allowing a county to appoint a prosecuting
attorney to act as coroner would fundamentally frustrate the legislature’s intent as expressed during
the legislative process, and such an approach would be contrary to our goal of advancing the
legislature’s intent. See Nelson, 2 Wn.3d at 237-39 (rejecting interpretation that would frustrate
the legislature’s intent).
Your request mentions the doctrine of incompatible offices. The common-law doctrine of
incompatible offices prohibits someone from simultaneously holding two incompatible offices.
AGO 2016 No. 7, at 3. “Offices are incompatible when the nature and duties of the offices are
such as to render it improper, from consideration of public policy, for one person to retain both.”
Kennett v. Levine, 50 Wn.2d 212, 216, 310 P.2d 244 (1957). Importantly, the doctrine applies
“in the absence of specific statutory provisions governing the positions in question.” AGLO 1973
No. 90, at 3. Here, both RCW 36.24.170 and RCW 2.48.200 prohibit a coroner from practicing
law. Therefore, we need not apply the common law doctrine of incompatible offices to answer
your question.
Your request could be interpreted as asking whether a county has the authority to assign
substantive duties to the prosecuting attorney in addition to their statutory duties, or to require the
prosecuting attorney to exercise the powers and perform the duties of both the prosecuting attorney
and the county coroner. The Washington Constitution delegates to the legislature the authority to
prescribe the duties of prosecuting attorneys and to require certain officers to “exercise the powers
and perform the duties of two or more officers.” Const. art. XI, § 5. Although your request could
potentially implicate issues related to article XI, section 5 of the Washington Constitution, we do
not believe it is necessary to address them because we resolve your question on statutory grounds.
Like courts, we generally avoid reaching constitutional issues where the issues can be resolved on
other grounds. Tunstall ex rel. Tunstall v. Bergeson, 141 Wn.2d 201, 210, 5 P.3d 691 (2000). And
here, we are able to resolve the inquiry based on statutory interpretation, and therefore do not reach
any potential constitutional issues.
We want to emphasize that Attorney General Opinions answer broad legal questions and
are not intended to resolve any particular case. This opinion expresses no view on what the remedy
should be, if any, if the principles discussed here were not followed in a particular case. Such
issues are beyond the scope of this opinion and might turn on a variety of facts specific to the case.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
The Honorables Vira, Hunt, and Slack 6 AGO 2024 No. 3
In conclusion, RCW 36.24.170 and RCW 2.48.200 will prohibit a prosecuting attorney
from performing the services of the county coroner when the 2021 amendments to RCW 36.16.030
go into effect on January 1, 2025.
We trust that the foregoing will be useful to you.
ROBERT W. FERGUSON
Attorney General
Kiera Miller
KIERA MILLER
Assistant Attorney General
wro