State v. Halsten
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, C.J.
The State charged Edward Halsten with possessing pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture methamphetamine because Halsten possessed cold tablets that contained pseudoephedrine hydrochloride. At trial, the State’s expert testified that pseudoephedrine *761hydrochloride is pseudoephedrine, but also discussed some differences between pseudoephedrine hydrochloride and pseudoephedrine. Halsten moved to dismiss, arguing that pseudoephedrine hydrochloride was not the same as pseudoephedrine, which is the only drug the statute banned. The trial court denied Halsten’s motion to dismiss, finding the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Cockle v. Dept. of Labor and IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. ThorneWashington Supreme Court · 1996
- Cockle v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Franklin County Sheriff's Office v. SellersWashington Supreme Court · 1982
- Rozner v. City of BellevueWashington Supreme Court · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State v. CromwellWashington Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. CromwellWashington Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
- State v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
- State v. HalstenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.