Wash. Rev. Code » Title 69 · Chapter 69.50
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.205 (2026)

Schedule II tests

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) [(1)] The commission shall place a substance in Schedule II upon finding that:
(1) [(a)] the substance has high potential for abuse;
(2) [(b)] the substance has currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, or currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions; and
(3) [(c)] the abuse of the substance may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.
(b) [(2)] The commission may place a substance in Schedule II without making the findings required by subsection (a) [(1)] of this section if the substance is controlled under Schedule II of the federal Controlled Substances Act by a federal agency as the result of an international treaty, convention, or protocol.
[ 2013 c 19 s 89; 1993 c 187 s 5; 1971 ex.s. c 308 s 69.50.205.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1997–1998 · leading case: Seeley v. State, 940 P.2d 604 (Wash. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Seeley v. State, 940 P.2d 604 (Wash. 1997). “RCW 69.50.205. In Washington, the Legislature made the initial scheduling placements when it adopted the Uniform Controlled Substances Act in 1971, including the placement of marijuana on schedule I.”
State v. Williams, 968 P.2d 26 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). “” RCW 69.50.205(a)(2). In Seeley , the Supreme Court exhaustively dealt with the classification issue both under the privileges and immunities clause of the Washington Constitution; the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; the equal protection clause; and…”
Seeley v. State, 940 P.2d 604 (Wash. 1997). “RCW 69.50.205. In Washington, the Legislature made the initial scheduling placements when it adopted the Uniform Controlled Substances Act in 1971, including the placement of marijuana on schedule I.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.205(a)(2) — 1 case
State v. Williams, 968 P.2d 26 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). “” RCW 69.50.205(a)(2). In Seeley , the Supreme Court exhaustively dealt with the classification issue both under the privileges and immunities clause of the Washington Constitution; the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; the equal protection clause; and…”
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.