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

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.308 (2026)

Prescriptions

✓ 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)] A controlled substance may be dispensed only as provided in this section. Prescriptions electronically communicated must also meet the requirements under RCW 69.50.312.
(b) [(2)] Except when dispensed directly by a practitioner authorized to prescribe or administer a controlled substance, other than a pharmacy, to an ultimate user, a substance included in Schedule II may not be dispensed without the written or electronically communicated prescription of a practitioner.
(1) [(a)] Schedule II narcotic substances may be dispensed by a pharmacy pursuant to a facsimile prescription under the following circumstances:
(i) The facsimile prescription is transmitted by a practitioner to the pharmacy; and
(ii) The facsimile prescription is for a patient in a long-term care facility or a hospice program; and
(iii) The practitioner or the practitioner's agent notes on the facsimile prescription that the patient is a long-term care or hospice patient.
(2) [(b)] Injectable Schedule II narcotic substances that are to be compounded for patient use may be dispensed by a pharmacy pursuant to a facsimile prescription if the facsimile prescription is transmitted by a practitioner to the pharmacy.
(3) [(c)] Under (1) and (2) [(a) and (b)] of this subsection the facsimile prescription shall serve as the original prescription and shall be maintained as other Schedule II narcotic substances prescriptions.
(c) [(3)] In emergency situations, as defined by rule of the commission, a substance included in Schedule II may be dispensed upon oral prescription of a practitioner, reduced promptly to writing and filed by the pharmacy. Prescriptions shall be retained in conformity with the requirements of RCW 69.50.306.
(d) [(4)] A prescription for a substance included in Schedule II may not be refilled. A prescription for a substance included in Schedule II may not be filled more than six months after the date the prescription was issued.
(e) [(5)] Except when dispensed directly by a practitioner authorized to prescribe or administer a controlled substance, other than a pharmacy, to an ultimate user, a substance included in Schedule III, IV, or V, which is a prescription drug as determined under RCW 69.04.560, may not be dispensed without a written, oral, or electronically communicated prescription of a practitioner. Any oral prescription must be promptly reduced to writing.
(f) [(6)] A written, oral, or electronically communicated prescription for a substance included in Schedule III, IV, or V, which is a prescription drug as determined under RCW 69.04.560, for a resident in a long-term care facility or hospice program may be communicated to the pharmacy by an authorized agent of the prescriber. A registered nurse, pharmacist, or physician practicing in a long-term care facility or hospice program may act as the practitioner's agent for purposes of this section, without need for a written agency agreement.
(g) [(7)] The prescription for a substance included in Schedule III, IV, or V may not be filled or refilled more than six months after the date issued by the practitioner or be refilled more than five times, unless renewed by the practitioner.
(h) [(8)] A valid prescription or lawful order of a practitioner, in order to be effective in legalizing the possession of controlled substances, must be issued in good faith for a legitimate medical purpose by one authorized to prescribe the use of such controlled substance. An order purporting to be a prescription not in the course of professional treatment is not a valid prescription or lawful order of a practitioner within the meaning and intent of this chapter; and the person who knows or should know that the person is filling such an order, as well as the person issuing it, can be charged with a violation of this chapter.
(i) [(9)] A substance included in Schedule V must be distributed or dispensed only for a medical purpose.
(j) [(10)] A practitioner may dispense or deliver a controlled substance to or for an individual or animal only for medical treatment or authorized research in the ordinary course of that practitioner's profession. Medical treatment includes dispensing or administering a narcotic drug for pain, including intractable pain.
(k) [(11)] No administrative sanction, or civil or criminal liability, authorized or created by this chapter may be imposed on a pharmacist for action taken in reliance on a reasonable belief that an order purporting to be a prescription was issued by a practitioner in the usual course of professional treatment or in authorized research.
(l) [(12)] An individual practitioner may not dispense a substance included in Schedule II, III, or IV for that individual practitioner's personal use.
(4) [(13)] For the purposes of this section, the terms "long-term care facility" and "hospice program" have the meaning[s] provided in RCW 18.64.011.
[ 2016 c 148 s 8; 2013 c 276 s 3; 2013 c 19 s 103; 2012 c 10 s 46; 2001 c 248 s 1; 1993 c 187 s 19; 1971 ex.s. c 308 s 69.50.308.]

Notes:

Reviser's note: This section was amended by 2013 c 19 s 103 and by 2013 c 276 s 3, each without reference to the other. Both amendments are incorporated in the publication of this section under RCW 1.12.025(2). For rule of construction, see RCW 1.12.025(1).
Application—2012 c 10: See note following RCW 18.20.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2021 · leading case: State v. Hathaway, 161 Wash. App. 634 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hathaway, 161 Wash. App. 634 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “Although RCW 69.50.308 allows for the prescribing and dispensing of schedule II drugs, this authority is limited to “medical treatment or authorized research” uses.”
State v. Hathaway, 251 P.3d 253 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “Although RCW 69.50.308 allows for the prescribing and dispensing of schedule II drugs, this authority is limited to "medical treatment or authorized research" uses.”
State v. Bell, 518 P.2d 696 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 6× “A section thereof, RCW 69.50.308 reads in pertinent part: (a) Except when dispensed directly by a practitioner authorized to prescribe or administer a controlled substance to an ultimate user, no controlled substance in Schedule II may be dispensed without the written…”
State v. Bell, 508 P.2d 1398 (Wash. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 10× “May 21, 1971, RCW 69.50.308 was not in effect until this date.”
State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “See RCW 69.50.308 (regulating the 25 No. 32708-6-111 (consol.”
State v. Tracy, 147 P.3d 559 (Wash. 2006). “101(w)(3); RCW 69.50.308(b). ¶ 39 The majority offers no persuasive rationale for holding that the people of Washington understood, let alone intended, that an otherwise qualified patient would be excluded from protection by I-692 simply because the patient's treating physician…”
Brown v. Vail, 237 P.3d 263 (Wash. 2010). “Specifically, the Appellants contend the Department is in violation of these acts because it uses sodium thiopental without a prescription as required by RCW 69.50.308(b) and 21 U.S.C. § 829 . ¶ 30 In the trial court below, the Department moved for summary judgment on Count III,…”
Dale E. Alsager, D.o., Phd. v. Wa State Bd Of Osteopathic Med., 196 Wash. App. 653 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “Physicians, allowed by law to prescribe controlled substances under RCW 69.50.308, should be even more aware than patients that the govern *672 ment exercises tight regulatory oversight of these controlled substances.”
In Re Farina, 972 P.2d 531 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “030 and RCW69.50.308 sections that authorized nurses (practitioners) to dispense controlled substances and legend drugs.”
State Of Washington v. Mary Yokel, 196 Wash. App. 424 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “¶15 Former RCW 69.50.308 (2013), one of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act’s statutes, allows practitioners to dispense controlled substances to an ultimate user pursuant to a prescription.”
State Of Washington v. Anthony G. Houck, 446 P.3d 646 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “005(2)(b) [(2011)] explicitly states that the legislature intended for ‘qualifying patients’ who benefit from marijuana to not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or other criminal sanctions based on their use of medical marijuana” and argues that former RCW 69.”
State v. Boyer, 576 P.2d 902 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). “, those sections dealing with lawful dispensation and prescription, RCW 69.50.308 and RCW 69.50.403. Thus, we have held the presumption of ''willfullness,'' to which a defense of "unwitting" may be asserted, is a common-law presumption and not a statutory presumption.”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.308(a) — 4 cases
State v. Hathaway, 161 Wash. App. 634 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “Although RCW 69.50.308 allows for the prescribing and dispensing of schedule II drugs, this authority is limited to “medical treatment or authorized research” uses.”
State v. Hathaway, 251 P.3d 253 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “Although RCW 69.50.308 allows for the prescribing and dispensing of schedule II drugs, this authority is limited to "medical treatment or authorized research" uses.”
In Re Farina, 972 P.2d 531 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “030 and RCW69.50.308 sections that authorized nurses (practitioners) to dispense controlled substances and legend drugs.”
Farina v. Dep't of Health, 972 P.2d 531 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.308(b) — 2 cases
State v. Tracy, 147 P.3d 559 (Wash. 2006). “101(w)(3); RCW 69.50.308(b). ¶ 39 The majority offers no persuasive rationale for holding that the people of Washington understood, let alone intended, that an otherwise qualified patient would be excluded from protection by I-692 simply because the patient's treating physician…”
Brown v. Vail, 237 P.3d 263 (Wash. 2010). “Specifically, the Appellants contend the Department is in violation of these acts because it uses sodium thiopental without a prescription as required by RCW 69.50.308(b) and 21 U.S.C. § 829 . ¶ 30 In the trial court below, the Department moved for summary judgment on Count III,…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.308(d) — 1 case
State v. Bell, 518 P.2d 696 (Wash. 1974). “A section thereof, RCW 69.50.308 reads in pertinent part: (a) Except when dispensed directly by a practitioner authorized to prescribe or administer a controlled substance to an ultimate user, no controlled substance in Schedule II may be dispensed without the written…”
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.