|
|
United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280 (1922)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280 (1922)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 258 U.S. 268, click here.
United States v. Behrman No. 582 Argued March 7, 1922 Decided March 27, 1922 258 U.S. 280
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Syllabus
1. An exception in a statute defining an offense is met in an indictment by alleging facts sufficient to show that the defendant was not within the exception. P. 287.
2. An indictment need only describe the crime with sufficient clearness to show the violation of law and to inform the defendant of the nature and cause of the accusation and enable him to plead the judgment, if any, in bar of further prosecution for the same offense. P. 288.
3. An indictment for a statutory offense need not charge scienter or intent if the statute does not make them elements. P. 288.
4. Under the Anti-Narcotic Act of December 17, 1914, c. 1, § 2, 38 Stat. 785, making it an offense to sell, barter, exchange or give away certain drugs except in pursuance of a written order of the person to whom such article is to be sold, etc., on an official form, and providing that nothing in the section shall apply to the dispensing or distribution of the drugs to a patient by a registered physician in the course of his professional practice only, or to their sale, dispensing, or distribution by a dealer to a consumer in pursuance of a written prescription issued by a registered physician, such a physician commits the offense if, knowing a person to be habitually addicted to the use of such drugs, and not purposing to treat him for any other disease, he issues him prescriptions for quantities sufficient to make a great number of doses, more than enough to satisfy his craving if all consumed at one time, intending that he shall use them by self-administration in divided doses over a period of several days, and thus enables the addict to obtain such excessive quantities, without other order, from a pharmacist, and to have them in his possession and control with no other restraint upon their administration or disposition than his own weakened will. P. 288.
Reversed.
Error to a judgment of the district court sustaining a demurrer to an indictment.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280 (1922) in 258 U.S. 280 258 U.S. 281–258 U.S. 285. Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=3ZG5MQA4AU8BF8D.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280 (1922), in 258 U.S. 280, pp. 258 U.S. 281–258 U.S. 285. Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=3ZG5MQA4AU8BF8D.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280 (1922). cited in 1922, 258 U.S. 280, pp.258 U.S. 281–258 U.S. 285. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=3ZG5MQA4AU8BF8D.
|