Legal Opinion
State v. Burgess
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided May 3, 1993No. S92G1284PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Sears-Collins, Justice.
Ronald Burgess, the appellee, sold a substance which he represented to be methamphetamine to an informant for $700. The substance turned out to be primarily niacinamide, a vitamin which is regarded as a “dangerous drug” in Georgia, OCGA § 16-13-71 (b) (640.3), and which is commonly used as a cutting agent for methamphetamine. The appellee was indicted and convicted for violating OCGA § 16-13-30.1 2 (“Section 30.1”), which provides that under cer tain circumstances the distribution of “noncontrolled substances” is a felony.
In a whole court decision, the Court of Appeals…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- State v. EstevezSupreme Court of Georgia · 1974
- Potts v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1978
- Haynes v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1982
- Montes v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Drinkard v. WalkerSupreme Court of Georgia · 2006
- Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2003
- Sinkfield v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1996
- Young v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2005
- Smith v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.