Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 333 / Act 368 of 1978
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303 (2026)

License required; renewal; scope of authority; compliance; additional requirements; persons exempted; waiving or imposing requirement for licensure; separate license for each principal place of business or professional practice; inspection; quarterly report.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

PUBLIC HEALTH CODE


Act 368 of 1978


333.7303 License required; renewal; scope of authority; compliance; additional requirements; persons exempted; waiving or imposing requirement for licensure; separate license for each principal place of business or professional practice; inspection; quarterly report.

Sec. 7303.

    (1) A person who manufactures, distributes, prescribes, or dispenses a controlled substance in this state or who proposes to engage in the manufacture, distribution, prescribing, or dispensing of a controlled substance in this state shall obtain a license issued by the administrator in accordance with the rules. A person who has been issued a controlled substances license by the administrator under this article and a license under article 15 shall renew the controlled substances license concurrently with the renewal of the license issued under article 15, and for an equal number of years.

    (2) A person licensed by the administrator under this article to manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, or conduct research with controlled substances may possess, manufacture, distribute, prescribe, dispense, or conduct research with those substances to the extent authorized by its license and in conformity with the other provisions of this article.

    (3) A license issued under this article to manufacture, distribute, prescribe, or dispense pharmaceutical-grade cannabis and the conduct of the licensee is subject to the additional requirements of article 8.

    (4) The following persons need not be licensed and may lawfully possess controlled substances or prescription forms under this article:

    (a) An agent or employee of a licensed manufacturer, distributor, prescriber, or dispenser of a controlled substance if acting in the usual course of the agent's or employee's business or employment.

    (b) A common or contract carrier or warehouseman, or an employee thereof, whose possession of a controlled substance or prescription form is in the usual course of business or employment.

    (c) An ultimate user or agent in possession of a controlled substance or prescription form pursuant to a lawful order of a practitioner or in lawful possession of a schedule 5 substance.

    (5) The administrator may waive or include by rule the requirement for licensure of certain manufacturers, distributors, prescribers, or dispensers, if it finds the waiver or inclusion is consistent with the public health and safety.

    (6) A separate license is required at each principal place of business or professional practice where the applicant manufactures, distributes, prescribes, or dispenses controlled substances.

    (7) As a requisite for licensure, the administrator may inspect the establishment of a licensee or applicant for licensure in accordance with the administrator's rule.

    (8) A person licensed under this article to distribute controlled substances shall report to the administrator on a quarterly basis all schedule 2 controlled substances and those controlled substances designated by the administrator pursuant to this subsection that are sold to licensed practitioners and retail pharmacies. The report shall be in writing and shall include the name of each licensed practitioner and retail pharmacy to whom the controlled substance was distributed. A report under this subsection may be transmitted electronically, if the transmission is ultimately reduced to writing. The administrator shall designate by rule the controlled substances in schedules 3 to 5 to be reported under this subsection.

History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978 ;-- Am. 1986, Act 174, Imd. Eff. July 7, 1986 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 9, Eff. Aug. 9, 1988 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 60, Eff. Aug. 1, 1989 ;-- Am. 2013, Act 268, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 2013

Compiler's Notes:

    Section 3 of Act 174 of 1986 provides: “This amendatory act shall only apply to contested cases filed on or after July 1, 1986.”

PopularName Notes:

Act 368

AdminRule Notes:

    R 338.471 et seq. and R 338.3101 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1985–2018 · leading case: People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 21× “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
State v. McQueen, 811 N.W.2d 513 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011). “, MCL 333.7303(1) (requiring that anyone who engages in these activities shall obtain a license issued by *657 the Michigan Board of Pharmacy); MCL 333.”
People v. Alan Jones, 513 N.W.2d 175 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “MCL 333.7303; MSA 14.15(7303). However, licensure is specifically waived for an "officer or employee of this state, or a political subdivision or agency of this state who is engaged in the enforcement of a state or local law relating to controlled substances and who is…”
People v. Ham-Ying, 371 N.W.2d 874 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “See MCL 333.7303(1); MSA 14.15(7303)(1). Because of the suspension imposed by the Board of Osteopathic Medicine, defendant at the time in question was not licensed to either prescribe or dispense controlled substances.”
People of Michigan v. Husam Kamil Alzehery (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “7401(1) makes it a crime to possess a controlled substance, whether lawfully or not, with the intent to deliver that substance unless the person possessing the controlled substance either (1) has obtained a valid license to deliver the substance under MCL 333.7303(1) and (2), or…”
People of Michigan v. Husam Kamil Alzehery (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “7401(1) makes it a crime to possess a controlled substance, whether lawfully or not, with the intent to deliver that substance unless the person possessing the controlled substance either (1) has obtained a valid license to deliver the substance under MCL 333.7303(1) and (2), or…”
Patricia Aldrich v. Chidozie Joshua Ononuju Do (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “upon receipt of a prescription of a [physician] licensed under [MCL 333.7303].” MCL 333.7333(2); see also MCL 333.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(1) — 5 cases
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
State v. McQueen, 811 N.W.2d 513 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011). “, MCL 333.7303(1) (requiring that anyone who engages in these activities shall obtain a license issued by *657 the Michigan Board of Pharmacy); MCL 333.”
People v. Ham-Ying, 371 N.W.2d 874 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “See MCL 333.7303(1); MSA 14.15(7303)(1). Because of the suspension imposed by the Board of Osteopathic Medicine, defendant at the time in question was not licensed to either prescribe or dispense controlled substances.”
People of Michigan v. Husam Kamil Alzehery (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “7401(1) makes it a crime to possess a controlled substance, whether lawfully or not, with the intent to deliver that substance unless the person possessing the controlled substance either (1) has obtained a valid license to deliver the substance under MCL 333.7303(1) and (2), or…”
People of Michigan v. Husam Kamil Alzehery (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “7401(1) makes it a crime to possess a controlled substance, whether lawfully or not, with the intent to deliver that substance unless the person possessing the controlled substance either (1) has obtained a valid license to deliver the substance under MCL 333.7303(1) and (2), or…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(4) — 3 cases
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
People of Michigan v. Husam Kamil Alzehery (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “7401(1) makes it a crime to possess a controlled substance, whether lawfully or not, with the intent to deliver that substance unless the person possessing the controlled substance either (1) has obtained a valid license to deliver the substance under MCL 333.7303(1) and (2), or…”
People of Michigan v. Husam Kamil Alzehery (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “7401(1) makes it a crime to possess a controlled substance, whether lawfully or not, with the intent to deliver that substance unless the person possessing the controlled substance either (1) has obtained a valid license to deliver the substance under MCL 333.7303(1) and (2), or…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(4)(a) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(4)(b) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(4)(c) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7303(5) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “See MCL 333.7303. Before considering these requirements, however, we must first examine several pertinent statutory definitions.”
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.