Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.030 (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) The following acts do not constitute crimes under state law or unprofessional conduct under chapter 18.130 RCW, and a health care professional may not be arrested, searched, prosecuted, disciplined, or subject to other criminal sanctions or civil consequences or liability under state law, or have real or personal property searched, seized, or forfeited pursuant to state law, notwithstanding any other provision of law as long as the health care professional complies with subsection (2) of this section:
(a) Advising a patient about the risks and benefits of medical use of cannabis or that the patient may benefit from the medical use of cannabis; or
(b) Providing a patient or designated provider meeting the criteria established under RCW 69.51A.010 with an authorization, based upon the health care professional's assessment of the patient's medical history and current medical condition, if the health care professional has complied with this chapter and he or she determines within a professional standard of care or in the individual health care professional's medical judgment the qualifying patient may benefit from the medical use of cannabis.
(2)(a) A health care professional may provide a qualifying patient or that patient's designated provider with an authorization for the medical use of cannabis in accordance with this section.
(b) In order to authorize for the medical use of cannabis under (a) of this subsection, the health care professional must:
(i) Have a documented relationship with the patient, as a principal care provider or a specialist, relating to the diagnosis and ongoing treatment or monitoring of the patient's terminal or debilitating medical condition;
(ii) Complete an in-person physical examination of the patient or a remote physical examination of the patient if one is determined to be appropriate under (c)(iii) of this subsection;
(iii) Document the terminal or debilitating medical condition of the patient in the patient's medical record and that the patient may benefit from treatment of this condition or its symptoms with medical use of cannabis;
(iv) Inform the patient of other options for treating the terminal or debilitating medical condition and documenting in the patient's medical record that the patient has received this information;
(v) Document in the patient's medical record other measures attempted to treat the terminal or debilitating medical condition that do not involve the medical use of cannabis; and
(vi) Complete an authorization on forms developed by the department, in accordance with subsection (3) of this section.
(c)(i) For a qualifying patient eighteen years of age or older, an authorization expires one year after its issuance. For a qualifying patient less than eighteen years of age, an authorization expires six months after its issuance.
(ii) An authorization may be renewed upon completion of an in-person physical examination or a remote physical examination of the patient if one is determined to be appropriate under (c)(iii) of this subsection and, in compliance with the other requirements of (b) of this subsection.
(iii) Following an in-person physical examination to authorize the use of cannabis for medical purposes, the health care professional may determine and note in the patient's medical record that subsequent physical examinations for the purposes of renewing an authorization may occur through the use of telemedicine technology if the health care professional determines that requiring the qualifying patient to attend a physical examination in person to renew an authorization would likely result in severe hardship to the qualifying patient because of the qualifying patient's physical or emotional condition.
(iv) When renewing a qualifying patient's authorization for the medical use of cannabis, the health care professional may indicate that the qualifying patient qualifies for a compassionate care renewal of his or her registration in the medical cannabis authorization database and recognition card if the health care professional determines that requiring the qualifying patient to renew a registration in person would likely result in severe hardship to the qualifying patient because of the qualifying patient's physical or emotional condition. A compassionate care renewal of a qualifying patient's registration and recognition card allows the qualifying patient to receive renewals without the need to be physically present at a retailer and without the requirement to have a photograph taken.
(d) A health care professional shall not:
(i) Accept, solicit, or offer any form of pecuniary remuneration from or to a cannabis retailer, cannabis processor, or cannabis producer;
(ii) Offer a discount or any other thing of value to a qualifying patient who is a customer of, or agrees to be a customer of, a particular cannabis retailer;
(iii) Examine or offer to examine a patient for purposes of diagnosing a terminal or debilitating medical condition at a location where cannabis is produced, processed, or sold;
(iv) Have a business or practice which consists primarily of authorizing the medical use of cannabis or authorize the medical use of cannabis at any location other than his or her practice's permanent physical location;
(v) Except as provided in RCW 69.51A.280, sell, or provide at no charge, cannabis concentrates, cannabis-infused products, or useable cannabis to a qualifying patient or designated provider; or
(vi) Hold an economic interest in an enterprise that produces, processes, or sells cannabis if the health care professional authorizes the medical use of cannabis.
(3) The department shall develop the form for the health care professional to use as an authorization for qualifying patients and designated providers. The form shall include the qualifying patient's or designated provider's name, address, and date of birth; the health care professional's name, address, and license number; the amount of cannabis recommended for the qualifying patient; a telephone number where the authorization can be verified during normal business hours; the dates of issuance and expiration; and a statement that an authorization does not provide protection from arrest unless the qualifying patient or designated provider is also entered in the medical cannabis authorization database and holds a recognition card.
(4) The appropriate health professions disciplining authority may inspect or request patient records to confirm compliance with this section. The health care professional must provide access to or produce documents, records, or other items that are within his or her possession or control within twenty-one calendar days of service of a request by the health professions disciplining authority. If the twenty-one calendar day limit results in a hardship upon the health care professional, he or she may request, for good cause, an extension not to exceed thirty additional calendar days. Failure to produce the documents, records, or other items shall result in citations and fines issued consistent with RCW 18.130.230. Failure to otherwise comply with the requirements of this section shall be considered unprofessional conduct and subject to sanctions under chapter 18.130 RCW.
(5) After a health care professional authorizes a qualifying patient for the medical use of cannabis, he or she may discuss with the qualifying patient how to use cannabis and the types of products the qualifying patient should seek from a retail outlet.
[ 2022 c 16 s 117; 2019 c 203 s 1; 2015 c 70 s 18; 2011 c 181 s 301; 2010 c 284 s 3; 2007 c 371 s 4; 1999 c 2 s 4 (Initiative Measure No. 692, approved November 3, 1998).]
Notes:
Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Short title—Findings—Intent—References to Washington state liquor control board—Draft legislation—2015 c 70: See notes following RCW 66.08.012.
Intent—2007 c 371: See note following RCW 69.51A.005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). There was no error; the condition is statutorily authorized.”
State v. Shepherd, 110 Wash. App. 544 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 69.51A.030. A designated primary caregiver should be afforded the same protection.”
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.”
Green Collar Club v. State, 413 P.3d 1083 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “*1087 ¶11 Health care professionals who comply with enumerated conditions do not commit a crime under state law when they advise patients about the risks and benefits of medical use of marijuana, state that the patient may benefit from it, or provide them with valid…”
State Of Washington, V. Robert Christopher Boese (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Because Washington’s medical cannabis statute allows a health care professional to authorize the medical use of cannabis, RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a), Boese contends it would be absurd for the legislature to authorize an exception for the lawful use of more serious controlled…”
State Of Washington, V. Gerardo Elicier Monge (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Monge cites RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a), allowing a health care professional to authorize the medical use of cannabis, to argue that “[i]t would be absurd for the legislature to authorize an exception for the lawful use of more serious controlled substances but no corollary exception…”
State of Washington v. Trevor Wayne Myers (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). CONCLUSION We affirm Trevor Myers' conviction for first degree robbery and his sentence, including the community custody condition disallowing use or possession of marijuana and products containing THC.”
State of Washington v. Ian Seth Almberg (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). The trial court here correctly recognized that marijuana is a nonprescribed controlled substance.”
State of Washington v. Caleb Earl Loutzenhiser (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). Issues 7 and 8: Did the judgment and sentence and clerk certification contain scrivener's errors that should be corrected? Answer 7 and 8: Yes and no.”
State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). There was no error; the condition is statutorily authorized.”
State Of Washington, V Frederick Mitchell Detwiler (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). The term “[v]alid documentation” means a statement that the patient may benefit from the medical use of marijuana.”
State of Washington v. Terral Ray Anthony Lewis (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). Given these circumstances, the restriction on II marijuana use was proper, and the language used in the judgment and sentence form was l not contradictory.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.030(2)(a) — 10 cases
State of Washington v. Thomas Lee Weatherwax, 193 Wash. App. 667 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). There was no error; the condition is statutorily authorized.”
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 Of Washington, V. Robert Christopher Boese (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Because Washington’s medical cannabis statute allows a health care professional to authorize the medical use of cannabis, RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a), Boese contends it would be absurd for the legislature to authorize an exception for the lawful use of more serious controlled…”
State Of Washington, V. Gerardo Elicier Monge (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Monge cites RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a), allowing a health care professional to authorize the medical use of cannabis, to argue that “[i]t would be absurd for the legislature to authorize an exception for the lawful use of more serious controlled substances but no corollary exception…”
State of Washington v. Trevor Wayne Myers (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 69.51A.030(2)(a). CONCLUSION We affirm Trevor Myers' conviction for first degree robbery and his sentence, including the community custody condition disallowing use or possession of marijuana and products containing THC.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.030(2)(b) — 1 case
State of Washington v. Jeremy Joseph Alvarez (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.030(2)(d)(iv) — 1 case
In the Matter of the Pers. Restraint of: Eric R. Lewis (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
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.