Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title XV Chapter 94C
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94C, § 3 (2026)

Findings required for placement in schedules

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 3. Except in the case of an immediate precursor, a drug or other substance may not be placed in any schedule unless such drug or substance has been scheduled pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Comprehensive Drug Abuse, Prevention and Control Act of 1970, or any amendment thereof, or unless the findings required for such schedule are made with respect to such drug or other substance. The findings required for each of the schedules are as follows:

(1) SCHEDULE I.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

(2) SCHEDULE II.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.

(C) Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.

(3) SCHEDULE III.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a potential for abuse less than the drugs or other substances in schedules I and II.

(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.

(4) SCHEDULE IV.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule III.

(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule III.

(5) SCHEDULE V.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule IV.

(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule IV.

(6) SCHEDULE VI.—

(A) The substance is a prescription drug; and

(B) Said prescription drug has not been included in Schedules I through V.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1983–2004 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Catalina, 556 N.E.2d 973 (Mass. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Catalina, 556 N.E.2d 973 (Mass. 1990). “§ 812 (b)(1) (West 1981); G. L. c. 94C, § 3 (1) (1988 ed.). Violation of our statute proscribing heroin distribution carries a severe penalty of up to ten years in prison and $10,000 in fines.”
Commonwealth v. Garcia, 612 N.E.2d 674 (Mass. App. Ct. 1993). “His argument ignores the central premise of the automatic standing rule; namely, that the crime for which the defendant is convicted must have as an essential element of guilt, possession (either actual or constructive) at the time of the contested search.”
Samuels Pharmacy, Inc. v. Bd. of Reg. in Pharmacy, 390 Mass. 583 (Mass. 1983). “G. L. c. 94C, § 3, as amended through St.”
Strasnick v. Bd. of Reg. in Pharmacy, 562 N.E.2d 1333 (Mass. 1990). “G. L. c. 94C, § 3 (2). 4 “The conclusory nature of the petitioners’ brief is such that it [does not comply] with the rule that the argument in an appellant’s brief ‘shall contain the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor,…”
Commonwealth v. Walker, 801 N.E.2d 267 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). “” See G. L. c. 94C, § 3(4), as inserted by St. 1971, c.”
Hilse v. Bd. of Reg. in Pharmacy, 12 Mass. L. Rptr. 82 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2000). “See G.L.c. 94C, §3. The Board acknowledged that there is no direct evidence that the plaintiff diverted or stole the drugs in question and that numerous other people had access to the pharmacy department of the store.”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94C, § 3(4) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Walker, 801 N.E.2d 267 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). “” See G. L. c. 94C, § 3(4), as inserted by St. 1971, c.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.