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

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.366 (2026)

Cannabis producers, employees—Certain acts not criminal or civil offenses

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The following acts, when performed by a validly licensed cannabis producer or employee of a validly licensed cannabis producer in compliance with rules adopted by the board to implement and enforce this chapter, do not constitute criminal or civil offenses under Washington state law:
(1) Production or possession of quantities of cannabis that do not exceed the maximum amounts established by the board under RCW 69.50.345(3);
(2) Delivery, distribution, and sale of cannabis to a cannabis processor or another cannabis producer validly licensed under this chapter;
(3) Delivery, distribution, and sale of immature plants or clones and cannabis seeds to a licensed cannabis researcher, and to receive or purchase immature plants or clones and seeds from a licensed cannabis researcher; and
(4) Delivery, distribution, and sale of cannabis or useable cannabis to a federally recognized Indian tribe as permitted under an agreement between the state and the tribe entered into under RCW 43.06.490.
[ 2022 c 16 s 74; 2017 c 317 s 6; 2015 c 207 s 8; 2013 c 3 s 17 (Initiative Measure No. 502, approved November 6, 2012).]

Notes:

Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Findings—Application—2017 c 317: See notes following RCW 69.50.325.
Intent—Finding—2015 c 207: See note following RCW 43.06.490.
Intent—2013 c 3 (Initiative Measure No. 502): See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2020–2023 · leading case: U4ik Gardens LLP, V State Liquor Control Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
U4ik Gardens LLP, V State Liquor Control Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5× “” RCW 69.50.366 clarifies that marijuana production by a licensed marijuana producer does not constitute a criminal or civil offense if done in compliance with the rules adopted by the Board.”
Ladyhelm Farm, LLC v. Liquor & Cannabis Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “Moreover, the legislature has also added provisions to the UCSA explaining how the statute interacts with the recreational regulation of cannabis, demonstrating an intent that the two statutes remain compatible.”
Seven Hills, LLC v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “In light of this statutory scheme, we do not believe that anyone could have a valid right to produce marijuana prior to the time the WSLCB authorized the activity. Here, Seven Hills did not obtain a valid license to produce marijuana until January 26, 2016.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.366(1) — 2 cases
Seven Hills, LLC v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “In light of this statutory scheme, we do not believe that anyone could have a valid right to produce marijuana prior to the time the WSLCB authorized the activity. Here, Seven Hills did not obtain a valid license to produce marijuana until January 26, 2016.”
U4ik Gardens LLP, V State Liquor Control Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “” RCW 69.50.366 clarifies that marijuana production by a licensed marijuana producer does not constitute a criminal or civil offense if done in compliance with the rules adopted by the Board.”
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.