Wash. Rev. Code » Title 69 · Chapter 69.53
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.53.010 (2026)

Unlawful use of building for drug purposes—Liability of owner or manager—Penalty

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) It is unlawful for any person who has under his or her management or control any building, room, space, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, to knowingly rent, lease, or make available for use, with or without compensation, the building, room, space, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, delivering, selling, storing, or giving away any controlled substance under chapter 69.50 RCW, legend drug under chapter 69.41 RCW, or imitation controlled substance under chapter 69.52 RCW.
(2) It shall be a defense for an owner, manager, or other person in control pursuant to subsection (1) of this section to, in good faith, notify a law enforcement agency of suspected drug activity pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, or to process an unlawful detainer action for drug-related activity against the tenant or occupant.
(3) A violation of this section is a class C felony punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW.
[ 1988 c 150 s 13; 1987 c 458 s 7.]

Notes:

Legislative findings—Severability—1988 c 150: See notes following RCW 59.18.130.
Severability—1987 c 458: See note following RCW 48.21.160.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1990–2017 · leading case: State v. Davis, 308 P.3d 807 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Davis, 308 P.3d 807 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 12× “DISCUSSION Use of a Building for Drug Purposes ¶19 Davis argues that the statute criminalizing use of a building for drug purposes, RCW 69.53.010, is unconstitutionally vague.”
State v. Sigman, 826 P.2d 144 (Wash. 1992). · cites it 4× “The issue presented in this case arises from interpretation of RCW 69.53.010(1), which, in relevant part, prohibits an owner of real property from knowingly renting, leasing or making available any building, space, room or enclosure for an illegal drug purpose.”
State v. Roberts, 908 P.2d 892 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “402(6) or RCW 69.53.010(1), which make criminal the knowing maintenance of any "place” for delivery, manufacture, sale, transfer, use, or storage of any controlled substance.”
State v. Bryant, 901 P.2d 1046 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “With respect to the charge of making a building available, the *811 culpability of an owner or manager for the unlawful use of a building for drug purposes runs only to persons with a defined relationship with the location or building where the controlled substance activity…”
State v. Holley, 876 P.2d 973 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “401(d), and unlawful use of a building for drug purposes, RCW 69.53.010(1). In conjunction with his pleas, Holley submitted two "Statement[s] of Defendant on Plea of Guilty”; one dealt with the gun charge, the other dealt with the drug charges.”
State v. Bryant, 901 P.2d 1046 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “With respect to the charge of making a building available, the culpability of an owner or manager for the unlawful use of a building for drug purposes runs only to persons with a defined relationship with the location or building where the controlled substance activity occurs.”
State v. Sigman, 802 P.2d 142 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 3× “RCW 69.53.010(1). We do not, however, find the statute unconstitutionally vague, as did the trial court.”
State Of Washington v. Gary Crow (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “— Gary Crow appeals his conviction for unlawful use of a building for drug purposes under RCW 69.53.010. He claims that the trial court erred by rejecting his proposed jury instructions defining a "meretricious relationship" and informing the jurors that if they found Crow and…”
State Of Washington v. Job M. Edwards (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “45764-4-II In order to convict Job of unlawful use of a building for drug purposes, the State must have proved that he knowingly made available for use a space under his management or control as a lessee to others for storing, manufacturing, selling, or delivering drugs.”
State of Washington v. Cherryl Ann Grant (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “RCW 69.53.010(1). Ms. Grant argues the evidence does not support the control element of this statute.”
State of Washington v. Daniel David Matz (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “" RCW 69.53.010(1). A person acts "knowingly" when he or she is aware or reasonably should be aware that existing facts constitute an offense.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.53.010(1) — 11 cases
State v. Davis, 308 P.3d 807 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “DISCUSSION Use of a Building for Drug Purposes ¶19 Davis argues that the statute criminalizing use of a building for drug purposes, RCW 69.53.010, is unconstitutionally vague.”
State v. Sigman, 826 P.2d 144 (Wash. 1992). “The issue presented in this case arises from interpretation of RCW 69.53.010(1), which, in relevant part, prohibits an owner of real property from knowingly renting, leasing or making available any building, space, room or enclosure for an illegal drug purpose.”
State v. Roberts, 908 P.2d 892 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “402(6) or RCW 69.53.010(1), which make criminal the knowing maintenance of any "place” for delivery, manufacture, sale, transfer, use, or storage of any controlled substance.”
State v. Holley, 876 P.2d 973 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). “401(d), and unlawful use of a building for drug purposes, RCW 69.53.010(1). In conjunction with his pleas, Holley submitted two "Statement[s] of Defendant on Plea of Guilty”; one dealt with the gun charge, the other dealt with the drug charges.”
State v. Bryant, 901 P.2d 1046 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). “With respect to the charge of making a building available, the *811 culpability of an owner or manager for the unlawful use of a building for drug purposes runs only to persons with a defined relationship with the location or building where the controlled substance activity…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.53.010(2) — 3 cases
State v. Roberts, 908 P.2d 892 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “402(6) or RCW 69.53.010(1), which make criminal the knowing maintenance of any "place” for delivery, manufacture, sale, transfer, use, or storage of any controlled substance.”
State v. Sigman, 826 P.2d 144 (Wash. 1992). “The issue presented in this case arises from interpretation of RCW 69.53.010(1), which, in relevant part, prohibits an owner of real property from knowingly renting, leasing or making available any building, space, room or enclosure for an illegal drug purpose.”
State Of Washington v. Job M. Edwards (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “45764-4-II In order to convict Job of unlawful use of a building for drug purposes, the State must have proved that he knowingly made available for use a space under his management or control as a lessee to others for storing, manufacturing, selling, or delivering drugs.”
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.