Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94.041 (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) Every person serving a sentence in any state correctional institution who, without legal authorization, while in the institution or while being conveyed to or from the institution, or while under the custody or supervision of institution officials, officers, or employees, or while on any premises subject to the control of the institution, knowingly possesses or carries upon his or her person or has under his or her control any narcotic drug or controlled substance, as defined in chapter 69.50 RCW, alcohol, cannabis, or other intoxicant, or a cell phone or other form of an electronic telecommunications device, is guilty of a class C felony.
(2) Every person confined in a county or local correctional institution who, without legal authorization, while in the institution or while being conveyed to or from the institution, or while under the custody or supervision of institution officials, officers, or employees, or while on any premises subject to the control of the institution, knowingly possesses or has under his or her control any narcotic drug or controlled substance, as defined in chapter 69.50 RCW, alcohol, cannabis, or other intoxicant, or a cell phone or other form of an electronic telecommunications device, is guilty of a class C felony.
(3) The sentence imposed under this section shall be in addition to any sentence being served.
(4) For the purposes of this section, "cannabis" has the meaning provided in RCW 69.50.101.
Notes:
Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: State v. Rainford, 936 P.2d 1210 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Rainford, 936 P.2d 1210 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “Rainford’s other claimed errors in procedure are likewise insufficient for a claim that his due process rights were violated. 5 II Rainford argues in his Personal Restraint Petition, consolidated herein with his appeal, that his conviction was unlawful because he should have…”
State v. Rainford, 936 P.2d 1210 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “Rainford's other claimed errors in procedure are likewise insufficient for a claim that his due process rights were violated.”
State v. Miller, 929 P.2d 372 (Wash. 1997). “The Information does not otherwise under each count cite statutes upon which the charges were based.”
State v. Miller, 929 P.2d 372 (Wash. 1997). “[7] The special allegation erroneously cited the weapons enhancement statute. The Information does not otherwise under each count cite statutes upon which the charges were based.”
State v. Eaton, 177 P.3d 157 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “Therefore, our inquiry is limited to determining whether the legislature intended RCW 9.”
State v. Brown, 658 P.2d 44 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). “Next Brown contends he was convicted under the wrong statute and should have been charged under RCW 9.94.041, which provides: Every person serving a sentence in any penal institution of this state who, without authorization, while in such penal institution or while being…”
State v. Eaton, 143 Wash. App. 155 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “Therefore, our inquiry is limited to determining whether the legislature intended RCW 9.94A.533(5) to punish a defendant for his involuntary possession of a controlled substance in a county jail or state correctional facility.”
State v. Soto, 309 P.3d 596 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “2d 1210 (1997) (“RCW 9.94.041 [possession of controlled substances by prisoners] is an unranked felony under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981[, chapter 9.”
State v. Terrovonia, 824 P.2d 537 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). “Terrovona was charged in October 1989 with possession of a controlled substance by a prisoner, RCW 9.94.041. 1 He moved to dismiss the charge *419 on the ground the prosecution was unconstitutionally selective.”
State Of Washington v. Jeffrey J. Palmer (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “53376-6-II (2) Every person confined in a county or local correctional institution who, without legal authorization, while in the institution or while being conveyed to or from the institution, or while under the custody or supervision of institution officials, officers, or…”
State Of Washington v. Tessita L. Woodard (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “pdf, for the proposition that actual knowledge is required to convict under RCW 9.94.041. In Allen, our Supreme Court held that to convict a person as an accomplice, that accomplice must have actual knowledge that principal was engaging in the crime eventually charged.”
Barbara Anderson v. Grant Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “Batton assumed the 14 No. 38892-1-III Anderson v. Grant County risk that led to his death when he unlawfully possessed a controlled substance while incarcerated (in violation of RCW 9.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9.94.041(2) — 4 cases
State Of Washington v. Jeffrey J. Palmer (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “53376-6-II (2) Every person confined in a county or local correctional institution who, without legal authorization, while in the institution or while being conveyed to or from the institution, or while under the custody or supervision of institution officials, officers, or…”
State Of Washington v. Tessita L. Woodard (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “pdf, for the proposition that actual knowledge is required to convict under RCW 9.94.041. In Allen, our Supreme Court held that to convict a person as an accomplice, that accomplice must have actual knowledge that principal was engaging in the crime eventually charged.”
Barbara Anderson v. Grant Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “Batton assumed the 14 No. 38892-1-III Anderson v. Grant County risk that led to his death when he unlawfully possessed a controlled substance while incarcerated (in violation of RCW 9.”
Anderson v. Grant Cnty. (Wash. 2026).
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.