Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.050 (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 lawful possession or manufacture of medical cannabis as authorized by this chapter shall not result in the forfeiture or seizure of any property.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted for constructive possession, conspiracy, or any other criminal offense solely for being in the presence or vicinity of medical cannabis or its use as authorized by this chapter.
(3) The state shall not be held liable for any deleterious outcomes from the medical use of cannabis by any qualifying patient.
[ 2022 c 16 s 121; 1999 c 2 s 7 (Initiative Measure No. 692, approved November 3, 1998).]
Notes:
Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 2002–2013 · leading case: State v. Shepherd, 41 P.3d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
State v. Shepherd, 41 P.3d 1235 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 69.51A.050. A designated primary caregiver should be afforded the same protection.”
State v. McCarty, 215 P.3d 1036 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “[10] Based on this clear statutory language, we also reject McCarty's related argument that she can raise this caregiver/provider defense as Otis's "accomplice," assuming, without deciding, that Otis is able to establish such a defense on his own behalf on retrial.”
State v. McCarty, 152 Wash. App. 351 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “We find no published cases addressing RCW 69.51A.050 for any purpose. For example, as the State notes in its supplemental brief, the burden of establishing any type of medical marijuana defense involves proving that the quantity of marijuana being manufactured is appropriate for…”
Sinclair v. City of Grandview, 973 F. Supp. 2d 1234 (E.D. Wash. 2013). “With regard to the arrest of Karen Sinclair, Plaintiffs rely on RCW 69.51A.050 (2008) in arguing that her arrest was unlawful.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.050(2) — 3 cases
State v. McCarty, 215 P.3d 1036 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “[10] Based on this clear statutory language, we also reject McCarty's related argument that she can raise this caregiver/provider defense as Otis's "accomplice," assuming, without deciding, that Otis is able to establish such a defense on his own behalf on retrial.”
State v. McCarty, 152 Wash. App. 351 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “We find no published cases addressing RCW 69.51A.050 for any purpose. For example, as the State notes in its supplemental brief, the burden of establishing any type of medical marijuana defense involves proving that the quantity of marijuana being manufactured is appropriate for…”
Sinclair v. City of Grandview, 973 F. Supp. 2d 1234 (E.D. Wash. 2013). “With regard to the arrest of Karen Sinclair, Plaintiffs rely on RCW 69.51A.050 (2008) in arguing that her arrest was unlawful.”
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.