Hall v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
HARWOOD, Justice.
We are not in accord with the conclusions of the Court of Criminal Appeals that because the indictment in this case failed to negative that the drugs possessed by the defendant were (1) obtained upon a valid prescription and held in the original container, or (2) were not delivered by a practitioner in the course of his practice and were held in the original container, stated no offense and was therefore void.
The indictment upon which the defendant below was convicted charged in parts pertinent to this review that the defendant:
“ * * * did * * * unlawfully possess 23 tablets…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. DevinnyNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Clark v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
- Britton v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Dorgan v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1940
- People v. . DevinnyNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Dickerson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1982
- Doggett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1975
- State v. GibbsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1976
- Watley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1989
- Ex Parte StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.