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

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.407 (2026)

Conspiracy

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this chapter is punishable by imprisonment or fine or both which may not exceed the maximum punishment prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 308 s 69.50.407.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 67 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: State v. Pineda-Pineda, 226 P.3d 164 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Pineda-Pineda, 226 P.3d 164 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 14× “040, the State must charge drug conspiracies under RCW 69.50.407, the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, which does not require a "substantial step.”
State v. Langworthy, 583 P.2d 1231 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 26× “The defendants Neil and Ellen Langworthy (brother-in-law and sister-in-law) appeal from a judgment of guilty rendered by the Skagit County Superior Court on a charge of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance (RCW 69.50.407). Defendants appeal. FACTS Neil Langworthy was an…”
State v. Pineda-Pineda, 154 Wash. App. 653 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 14× “040, the State must charge drug conspiracies under RCW 69.50.407, the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, which does not require a “substantial step.”
State v. Pacheco, 882 P.2d 183 (Wash. 1994). · cites it 10× “040 and RCW 69.50.407 require an actual agreement between two coconspirators, and, therefore, reverse his convictions for conspiracy to commit murder in the first degree and conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance.”
State v. Roby, 840 P.2d 218 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 14× “They contend their convictions under RCW 69.50.407, a class C felony, instead of under RCW 9A.”
State v. Brockob, 150 P.3d 59 (Wash. 2006). · cites it 3× “440 (2000) and one count of attempted manufacture of methamphetamine under RCW 69.50.407 and former RCW 69.50.401(a)(l)(ii) (1998).”
State v. Lynn, 835 P.2d 251 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “11 *348 Impossibility Defense Lynn contends that he cannot be convicted of attempt to possess a controlled substance, RCW 69.50.407, because the substance actually delivered to him was not a controlled substance.”
United States v. Webb, 166 F. Supp. 3d 1198 (W.D. Wash. 2016). · cites it 19× “” RCW 69.50.407 punishes any person who “attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in [the uniformed controlled substances act].”
State v. Casarez-Gastelum, 738 P.2d 303 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “Cesar Casarez-Gastelum appeals his convictions of one count conspiracy to sell a controlled substance, heroin, for profit (RCW 69.50.407, .410) and one count conspiracy to possess with intent to deliver a controlled substance (RCW 69.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Hopkins, 976 P.2d 616 (Wash. 1999). · cites it 5× “2 In general, Washington law criminalizes three inchoate or “anticipatory” offenses: attempt; solicitation; and conspiracy. RCW 9A.28.020, .030, .”
State v. Mendoza, 819 P.2d 387 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 7× “conspiracy under chapter 9A.28 RCW". (Italics ours.) Mendoza was not charged with, or convicted of, conspiracy under RCW 9A.”
In re the Pers. Restraint of Bowman, 109 Wash. App. 869 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 5× “He argues that the rule of lenity requires us to determine that solicitation to deliver *872 cocaine is an offense under RCW 69.50.407, not RCW 9A.28.030. II To receive collateral review of a conviction on nonconstitutional grounds, a petitioner must establish that the claimed…”
Show all 67 citing cases →
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.