Reynolds v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERTS, Judge.
These are appeals from four convictions for delivery of methamphetamine, a controlled substance. In each case the court assessed punishment at five years.
Appellant contends that because there is a positive conflict between the Texas Controlled Substances Act and the Federal Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act, a conviction under the Texas Act cannot be sustained; he also contends that his convictions violate our state and federal double jeopardy provisions. We overrule these contentions and affirm.
We turn first to appellant’s contention that the punishment provisions…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Bartkus v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Waller v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Stein v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Huffman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Vanderbilt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Commonwealth v. CepulonisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- Bright v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Port v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1990
- Morales v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.