Legal Opinion
In Re Gray
California Supreme Court
Decided February 15, 1929No. Docket No. Crim. 3164PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Petitioner was taken into custody under a warrant of arrest issued out of the justice’s court of Sacramento township, charging him with the commission of a misdemeanor, to wit, violation of an act regulating the practice of pharmacy. (Stats. 1905, chap. 406, p. 535, and amendments thereto.) The complaint on which the warrant issued charged petitioner more specifically with having dispensed certain household drugs, to wit, tincture of arnica, spirits of camphor, almond oil, distilled extract witch-hazel, syrup of ipecac, syrup of rhubarb, hive syrup, sweet spirits of nitre, tincture…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- State v. ChildsArizona Supreme Court · 1927
- State Board of Pharmacy v. . MatthewsNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- State v. ZotalisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- People v. AbrahamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Blinder v. Division of Narcotic EnforcementCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- North Carolina Board of Pharmacy v. LaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- People v. PerelesAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1932
- Moehring v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.