Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401 (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) Except as authorized by this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to manufacture, deliver, or possess with intent to manufacture or deliver, a controlled substance.

(2) Any person who violates this section with respect to:

(a) A controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II which is a narcotic drug or flunitrazepam, including its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, classified in Schedule IV, is guilty of a class B felony and upon conviction may be imprisoned for not more than ten years, or (i) fined not more than twenty-five thousand dollars if the crime involved less than two kilograms of the drug, or both such imprisonment and fine; or (ii) if the crime involved two or more kilograms of the drug, then fined not more than one hundred thousand dollars for the first two kilograms and not more than fifty dollars for each gram in excess of two kilograms, or both such imprisonment and fine;

(b) Amphetamine, including its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, or methamphetamine, including its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, is guilty of a class B felony and upon conviction may be imprisoned for not more than ten years, or (i) fined not more than twenty-five thousand dollars if the crime involved less than two kilograms of the drug, or both such imprisonment and fine; or (ii) if the crime involved two or more kilograms of the drug, then fined not more than one hundred thousand dollars for the first two kilograms and not more than fifty dollars for each gram in excess of two kilograms, or both such imprisonment and fine. Three thousand dollars of the fine may not be suspended. As collected, the first three thousand dollars of the fine must be deposited with the law enforcement agency having responsibility for cleanup of laboratories, sites, or substances used in the manufacture of the methamphetamine, including its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers. The fine moneys deposited with that law enforcement agency must be used for such clean-up cost;

(c) Any other controlled substance classified in Schedule I, II, or III, is guilty of a class C felony punishable according to chapter 9A.20 RCW, except as provided in RCW 69.50.475;

(d) A substance classified in Schedule IV, except flunitrazepam, including its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, is guilty of a class C felony punishable according to chapter 9A.20 RCW; or

(e) A substance classified in Schedule V, is guilty of a class C felony punishable according to chapter 9A.20 RCW.

(3) The production, manufacture, processing, packaging, delivery, distribution, sale, or possession of cannabis in compliance with the terms set forth in RCW 69.50.360, 69.50.363, or 69.50.366 shall not constitute a violation of this section, this chapter, or any other provision of Washington state law.

(4) The fines in this section apply to adult offenders only.

[ 2022 c 16 s 84; 2019 c 379 s 2; 2015 c 265 s 34; 2013 c 3 s 19 (Initiative Measure No. 502, approved November 6, 2012); 2005 c 218 s 1; 2003 c 53 s 331. Prior: 1998 c 290 s 1; 1998 c 82 s 2; 1997 c 71 s 2; 1996 c 205 s 2; 1989 c 271 s 104; 1987 c 458 s 4; 1979 c 67 s 1; 1973 2nd ex.s. c 2 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 308 s 69.50.401.]

Notes:

Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.

Finding—Intent—2015 c 265: See note following RCW 13.50.010.

Intent—2013 c 3 (Initiative Measure No. 502): See note following RCW 69.50.101.

Intent—Effective date—2003 c 53: See notes following RCW 2.48.180.

Application—1998 c 290: "This act applies to crimes committed on or after July 1, 1998." [ 1998 c 290 s 9.]

Effective date—1998 c 290: "This act takes effect July 1, 1998." [ 1998 c 290 s 10.]

Severability—1998 c 290: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 1998 c 290 s 11.]

Application—1989 c 271 ss 101-111: See note following RCW 9.94A.510.

Severability—1989 c 271: See note following RCW 9.94A.510.

Severability—1987 c 458: See note following RCW 48.21.160.

Serious drug offenders, notice of release or escape: RCW 72.09.710.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 989 cases (46 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: State v. Smith, 610 P.2d 869 (Wash. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Smith, 610 P.2d 869 (Wash. 1980). · cites it 54× “Additionally, while RCW 69.50.401 distinguishes the various activities associated with marijuana use in our society, it does not impose less stringent penalties for mere possession of the controlled substance.”

United States v. Jose Valdivia-Flores, 876 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2017). · cites it 21× “ALDIVIA-FLORES Opinion by Judge O’Scannlain; Special Concurrence by Judge O’Scannlain; Dissent by Judge Rawlinson SUMMARY ** Criminal Law The panel reversed a criminal judgment, and remanded, in a case in which the defendant, who was convicted of attempted reentry of a removed…”

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). · cites it 35× “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

State v. Flores, 164 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 24× “Former RCW 69.50.401(a)(l)(i) (1998). Former RCW 69.”

State v. Silva-Baltazar, 886 P.2d 138 (Wash. 1994). · cites it 32× “In short, RCW 69.50.401 enumerates the maximum penalties, in fines and imprisonment, for certain drug crimes, and RCW 69.”

State v. Flores, 186 P.3d 1038 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 24× “[4] Former RCW 69.50.401(a)(1)(i). [5] Former RCW 69.”

State v. Goodman, 150 Wash. 2d 774 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 13× “Goodman challenges his conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver in violation of RCW 69.50.401(a). The amended information upon which he was convicted identified the controlled substance as “meth” rather than the full name “methamphetamine,”…”

State v. Goodman, 83 P.3d 410 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 13× “Petitioner Jay Goodman challenges his conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver in violation of *412 RCW 69.50.401(a). The amended information upon which he was convicted identified the controlled substance as "meth" rather than the full name…”

State v. Zillyette, 307 P.3d 712 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 14× “Zillyette, in Grays Harbor County, Washington, on or about March 31,-April 1, 2009 did unlawfully deliver a controlled substance to Austin Burrows in violation of RCW 69.50.401, which controlled substance was subsequently used by Austin Burrows, resulting in his death; CONTRARY…”

In Re Davis, 12 P.3d 603 (Wash. 2000). · cites it 21× “RCW 69.50.401 (emphasis added). The State contends since each separate intention to deliver is separately punishable, each separate location of manufacture should *611 likewise be considered a separate unit of prosecution in manufacture cases.”

State v. Cromwell, 157 Wash. 2d 529 (Wash. 2006). · cites it 26× “Applying Jackson , we should likewise conclude salts, isomers, and salts of its isomers were not included in subsection (ii) of former RCW 69.50.401(a)(1). ¶32 The majority refuses to follow Morris and Halsten and instead engages in second-guessing what the legislature meant to…”

State v. McGee, 864 P.2d 912 (Wash. 1993). · cites it 19× “435(a) provided: Any person who violates RCW 69.50.401(a) by manufacturing, selling, delivering, or possessing with the intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver a controlled substance listed under that subsection to a person in a school .”

Show all 989 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(1) — 143 cases

State v. Otis, 213 P.3d 613 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009).

State v. Winings, 126 Wash. App. 75 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

State v. Winings, 107 P.3d 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

State v. Corona, 261 P.3d 680 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).

State v. Otis, 151 Wash. App. 572 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(1)(2)(b) — 4 cases

State v. Leffler, 178 P.3d 1042 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007).

State v. Leffler, 173 P.3d 293 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007).

State Of Washington, V Steven Leroy Hicks (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).

State Of Washington, V Shane Christopher Gilbert (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(1)(a) — 1 case

State of Washington v. Thomas Alvin Swarers (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(1)(a)(ii) — 1 case

State v. Mayer, 86 P.3d 217 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(1)(d) — 1 case

State v. Glossbrener, 49 P.3d 128 (Wash. 2002).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(1)(i) — 1 case

State v. Boland, 800 P.2d 1112 (Wash. 1990).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2) — 11 cases

State v. Zillyette, 307 P.3d 712 (Wash. 2013). “Zillyette, in Grays Harbor County, Washington, on or about March 31,-April 1, 2009 did unlawfully deliver a controlled substance to Austin Burrows in violation of RCW 69.50.401, which controlled substance was subsequently used by Austin Burrows, resulting in his death; CONTRARY…”

State v. Bennett, 275 P.3d 1224 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).

State v. Thacker, 2024 Ohio 5835 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).

State v. Corona, 261 P.3d 680 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).

State v. Christman, 160 Wash. App. 741 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2)(A) — 1 case

State v. Ramos, 263 P.3d 1268 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2)(a) — 22 cases

State v. Winings, 126 Wash. App. 75 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

State v. Winings, 107 P.3d 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

State v. Wade, 346 P.3d 838 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

State v. McGrew, 234 P.3d 268 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2)(a)(i) — 1 case

State Of Washington v. Justin Stone (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2)(b) — 37 cases

State Of Washington v. Randolph C. Clark-el, 384 P.3d 627 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).

State v. Vazquez, 494 P.3d 424 (Wash. 2021).

State v. Sibert, 230 P.3d 142 (Wash. 2010).

State v. Chamberlin, 162 P.3d 389 (Wash. 2007).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2)(c) — 21 cases

State v. Tibbles, 236 P.3d 885 (Wash. 2010).

State v. Tibbles, 169 Wash. 2d 364 (Wash. 2010).

State v. Cardwell, 155 Wash. App. 41 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).

State v. Ellis, 315 P.3d 1170 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(2)(d) — 5 cases

State v. Harner, 153 Wash. 2d 228 (Wash. 2004).

State v. Wilson, 170 Wash. 2d 682 (Wash. 2010).

State v. Wilson, 244 P.3d 950 (Wash. 2010).

State v. Zillyette (Wash. 2013).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(3) — 3 cases

State of Washington v. Carlos Negrete, Jr. (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

U4ik Gardens LLP, V State Liquor Control Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021).

State Of Washington v. Alex Robert Buckingham (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(3)(a) — 1 case

State Of Washington v. Jerry L. Peterson, 457 P.3d 480 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(A)(1)(II) — 1 case

State v. Ague-Masters, 156 P.3d 265 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(E) — 1 case

City of Seattle v. Briggs, 38 P.3d 349 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a) — 250 cases

State v. Smith, 610 P.2d 869 (Wash. 1980). “Additionally, while RCW 69.50.401 distinguishes the various activities associated with marijuana use in our society, it does not impose less stringent penalties for mere possession of the controlled substance.”

State v. Silva-Baltazar, 886 P.2d 138 (Wash. 1994). “In short, RCW 69.50.401 enumerates the maximum penalties, in fines and imprisonment, for certain drug crimes, and RCW 69.”

State v. McGee, 864 P.2d 912 (Wash. 1993). “435(a) provided: Any person who violates RCW 69.50.401(a) by manufacturing, selling, delivering, or possessing with the intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver a controlled substance listed under that subsection to a person in a school .”

State v. Goodman, 150 Wash. 2d 774 (Wash. 2004). “Goodman challenges his conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver in violation of RCW 69.50.401(a). The amended information upon which he was convicted identified the controlled substance as “meth” rather than the full name “methamphetamine,”…”

State v. Gocken, 896 P.2d 1267 (Wash. 1995).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1) — 48 cases

State v. Sibert, 230 P.3d 142 (Wash. 2010).

State v. Knapstad, 729 P.2d 48 (Wash. 1986).

United States v. Jose Valdivia-Flores, 876 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2017). “ALDIVIA-FLORES Opinion by Judge O’Scannlain; Special Concurrence by Judge O’Scannlain; Dissent by Judge Rawlinson SUMMARY ** Criminal Law The panel reversed a criminal judgment, and remanded, in a case in which the defendant, who was convicted of attempted reentry of a removed…”

State v. Grayson, 111 P.3d 1183 (Wash. 2005).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(H) — 1 case

State v. Ague-Masters, 138 Wash. App. 86 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(f) — 1 case

State v. Wade, 966 P.2d 384 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(h) — 10 cases

State v. Cromwell, 157 Wash. 2d 529 (Wash. 2006). “Applying Jackson , we should likewise conclude salts, isomers, and salts of its isomers were not included in subsection (ii) of former RCW 69.50.401(a)(1). ¶32 The majority refuses to follow Morris and Halsten and instead engages in second-guessing what the legislature meant to…”

State v. Morris, 123 Wash. App. 467 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Mayer, 120 Wash. App. 720 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Clark, 94 P.3d 335 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

Franklin v. Klundt, 746 P.2d 1228 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(i) — 47 cases

State v. Atsbeha, 16 P.3d 626 (Wash. 2001).

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

State v. McDougal, 841 P.2d 1232 (Wash. 1992).

State v. Porter, 82 P.3d 234 (Wash. 2004).

State v. Flores, 186 P.3d 1038 (Wash. 2008). “[4] Former RCW 69.50.401(a)(1)(i). [5] Former RCW 69.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(i)(A) — 1 case

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(ii) — 50 cases

State v. Cromwell, 140 P.3d 593 (Wash. 2006).

State v. Morris, 98 P.3d 513 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Goodman, 83 P.3d 410 (Wash. 2004). “Petitioner Jay Goodman challenges his conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver in violation of *412 RCW 69.50.401(a). The amended information upon which he was convicted identified the controlled substance as "meth" rather than the full name…”

State v. O'NEAL, 109 P.3d 429 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(ii)(A) — 2 cases

State v. Cromwell, 112 P.3d 1273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

State v. Cromwell, 127 Wash. App. 746 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(1)(iii) — 16 cases

In Re Davis, 12 P.3d 603 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 69.50.401 (emphasis added). The State contends since each separate intention to deliver is separately punishable, each separate location of manufacture should *611 likewise be considered a separate unit of prosecution in manufacture cases.”

State v. Morris, 98 P.3d 513 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Cromwell, 140 P.3d 593 (Wash. 2006).

State v. O'NEAL, 109 P.3d 429 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(9)(i) — 1 case

State v. Sherwood, 860 P.2d 407 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(i) — 1 case

State v. Bernal, 33 P.3d 1106 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(ii) — 2 cases

State v. Miller, 929 P.2d 372 (Wash. 1997).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(l)(i) — 49 cases

State v. Atsbeha, 142 Wash. 2d 904 (Wash. 2001).

State v. Porter, 150 Wash. 2d 732 (Wash. 2004).

State v. McFarland, 899 P.2d 1251 (Wash. 1995).

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

State v. Flores, 164 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2008). “Former RCW 69.50.401(a)(l)(i) (1998). Former RCW 69.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(l)(i)(A) — 1 case

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(l)(i)(B) — 1 case

State v. Lopez, 904 P.2d 1179 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(l)(ii) — 37 cases

State v. Morris, 123 Wash. App. 467 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

State v. DeVries, 72 P.3d 748 (Wash. 2003).

State v. Brockob, 150 P.3d 59 (Wash. 2006).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(l)(iii) — 11 cases

In re the Pers. Restraint of Davis, 142 Wash. 2d 165 (Wash. 2000).

State v. Morris, 123 Wash. App. 467 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Sibert, 230 P.3d 142 (Wash. 2010).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(l)(n) — 1 case

State v. Graham, 846 P.2d 578 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(a)(lXii) — 1 case

State v. Evans, 129 Wash. App. 211 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(aXl) — 1 case

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(b) — 1 case

State v. Bernard, 899 P.2d 21 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(b)(l)(i) — 1 case

State v. Williams, 853 P.2d 1388 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(c) — 59 cases

State v. Blake, 481 P.3d 521 (Wash. 2021).

State v. Barrow, 809 P.2d 209 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991).

State v. Alexander, 888 P.2d 1169 (Wash. 1995). “A violation of RCW 69.50.401(aXlXi) by delivering cocaine is considered a level 8 crime under RCW 9.”

State v. Cleppe, 635 P.2d 435 (Wash. 1981).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(c)(e) — 1 case

State v. Wilson, 631 P.2d 362 (Wash. 1981).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(d) — 166 cases

State v. Kinzy, 5 P.3d 668 (Wash. 2000).

State v. Williams, 815 P.2d 825 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991).

State v. McCollum, 947 P.2d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).

State v. Acrey, 64 P.3d 594 (Wash. 2003).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(e) — 41 cases

State v. Adel, 965 P.2d 1072 (Wash. 1998).

State v. Adel, 136 Wash. 2d 629 (Wash. 1998).

Williams v. State, 104 So. 3d 254 (Ala. Crim. App. 2012).

State v. Acrey, 64 P.3d 594 (Wash. 2003).

State v. Acrey, 148 Wash. 2d 738 (Wash. 2003).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(f) — 7 cases

State v. Flores, 164 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2008). “Former RCW 69.50.401(a)(l)(i) (1998). Former RCW 69.”

State v. Flores, 186 P.3d 1038 (Wash. 2008). “[4] Former RCW 69.50.401(a)(1)(i). [5] Former RCW 69.”

State v. Duran-Davila, 892 P.2d 1125 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995).

State v. Hollis, 970 P.2d 813 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999).

State v. L.K., 977 P.2d 39 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(l) — 1 case

State v. Franklin, 263 P.3d 585 (Wash. 2011).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.401(l)(d) — 1 case

State v. Shannon, 892 P.2d 757 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995).

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.