Wash. Rev. Code » Title 46 · Chapter 46.61
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.5249 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1)(a) A person is guilty of negligent driving in the first degree if he or she operates a motor vehicle in a manner that is both negligent and endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property, and exhibits the effects of having consumed liquor or cannabis or any drug or exhibits the effects of having inhaled or ingested any chemical, whether or not a legal substance, for its intoxicating or hallucinatory effects.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to negligent driving in the first degree by means of exhibiting the effects of having consumed any drug that must be proved by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence, that the driver has a valid prescription for the drug consumed, and has been consuming it according to the prescription directions and warnings.
(c) Negligent driving in the first degree is a misdemeanor.
(2) For the purposes of this section:
(a) "Negligent" means the failure to exercise ordinary care, and is the doing of some act that a reasonably careful person would not do under the same or similar circumstances or the failure to do something that a reasonably careful person would do under the same or similar circumstances.
(b) "Exhibiting the effects of having consumed liquor, cannabis, or any drug" means that a person has the odor of liquor, cannabis, or any drug on his or her breath, or that by speech, manner, appearance, behavior, lack of coordination, or otherwise exhibits that he or she has consumed liquor, cannabis, or any drug, and either:
(i) Is in possession of or in close proximity to a container that has or recently had liquor, cannabis, or any drug in it; or
(ii) Is shown by other evidence to have recently consumed liquor, cannabis, or any drug.
(c) "Exhibiting the effects of having inhaled or ingested any chemical, whether or not a legal substance, for its intoxicating or hallucinatory effects" means that a person by speech, manner, appearance, behavior, or lack of coordination or otherwise exhibits that he or she has inhaled or ingested a chemical and either:
(i) Is in possession of the canister or container from which the chemical came; or
(ii) Is shown by other evidence to have recently inhaled or ingested a chemical for its intoxicating or hallucinatory effects.
(3) Any act prohibited by this section that also constitutes a crime under any other law of this state may be the basis of prosecution under such other law notwithstanding that it may also be the basis for prosecution under this section.
(4) A person convicted of negligent driving in the first degree who has one or more prior offenses as defined in RCW 46.61.5055(14) within seven years shall be required, under RCW 46.20.720, to install an ignition interlock device on all vehicles operated by the person.
[ 2022 c 16 s 44; 2013 2nd sp.s. c 35 s 16; 2012 c 183 s 13; 2011 c 293 s 5; 1997 c 66 s 4.]

Notes:

Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Effective date—2012 c 183: See note following RCW 9.94A.475.
Effective date—2011 c 293 ss 1-9: See note following RCW 46.20.385.
Criminal history and driving record: RCW 46.61.513.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2023 · leading case: State v. Wu, 453 P.3d 975 (Wash. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Wu, 453 P.3d 975 (Wash. 2019). · cites it 3× “5055(14)(a)(xii) defines "prior offenses" for purposes ofthe felony DUI statute as including "[a] conviction for a violation ofRCW 46.61.5249 [negligent driving], 46.61.”
State v. Mullen, 345 P.3d 26 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “504 (Physical Control) or an equivalent local ordinance; (3) A conviction for a violation of RCW 46.61.5249 (Negligent Driving in the First Degree), RCW 46.”
State v. Bosio, 107 Wash. App. 462 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “525 and inserted it under RCW 46.61.5249. Laws of 1997, ch. 66, §§ 4, 5.”
State v. Chambers, 237 P.3d 352 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “522 [vehicular assault] committed while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug; (v) A conviction for a violation of RCW 46.61.5249 [negligent driving-first degree], 46.”
City of Walla Walla v. Greene, 154 Wash. 2d 722 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 3× “FACTS ¶2 In 2000, Kathleen Greene (Greene) was charged with DUI, to which she pleaded guilty to an amended charge of first degree negligent driving, under RCW 46.61.5249 1 In 2004, on the current offense, Greene was charged and convicted of DUI.”
State v. Farr-Lenzini, 970 P.2d 313 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “525 and inserted it under RCW 46.61.5249. Laws of 1997, ch. 66, §§ 4, 5.”
City of Seattle v. Quezada, 142 Wash. App. 43 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “522 committed while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug; (v) A conviction for a violation of RCW 46.61.5249, 46.61.500, or 9A.36.050 or an equivalent local ordinance, if the conviction is the result of a charge that was originally filed as a violation of RCW…”
City of Kennewick v. Day, 142 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2000). “See RCW 46.61.5249. The arresting officer also cited Day for possession of marijuana under 40 grams and possession of drug paraphernalia under the Kennewick Municipal Code.”
City of Kennewick v. Day, 11 P.3d 304 (Wash. 2000). “See RCW 46.61.5249. The arresting officer also cited Day for possession of marijuana under 40 grams and possession of drug paraphernalia under the Kennewick Municipal Code.”
State v. Shaffer, 113 Wash. App. 812 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “The other convictions that may serve, in part, as the predicates for enhancement are negligent driving in the first degree (RCW 46.61.5249) or reckless endangerment (RCW 9A.”
State v. Bosio, 27 P.3d 636 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “525 and inserted it under RCW 46.61.5249. Laws of 1997, ch. 66, §§ 4, 5.”
State v. Warren, 127 Wash. App. 893 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “¶14 Applying the test set forth in Eppens, we reverse the superior court and remand for reinstatement of Warren’s conviction for first degree negligent driving. Coleman and Appelwick, JJ., concur.”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.5249(1)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Bosio, 107 Wash. App. 462 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “525 and inserted it under RCW 46.61.5249. Laws of 1997, ch. 66, §§ 4, 5.”
State v. Bosio, 27 P.3d 636 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “525 and inserted it under RCW 46.61.5249. Laws of 1997, ch. 66, §§ 4, 5.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.5249(1)(c) — 1 case
State v. Warren, 127 Wash. App. 893 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “¶14 Applying the test set forth in Eppens, we reverse the superior court and remand for reinstatement of Warren’s conviction for first degree negligent driving. Coleman and Appelwick, JJ., concur.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.5249(c) — 1 case
State v. Warren, 112 P.3d 1284 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.5249(l)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Mullen, 345 P.3d 26 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “504 (Physical Control) or an equivalent local ordinance; (3) A conviction for a violation of RCW 46.61.5249 (Negligent Driving in the First Degree), RCW 46.”
State v. Wu, 453 P.3d 975 (Wash. 2019). “5055(14)(a)(xii) defines "prior offenses" for purposes ofthe felony DUI statute as including "[a] conviction for a violation ofRCW 46.61.5249 [negligent driving], 46.61.”
State of Washington v. Crystal Rain Fuchs (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
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.