Commonwealth v. Tarabilda
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hoppman, J.,
This is an appeal from appellant’s conviction for transferring a narcotic drug, a violation of The Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act, 35 P.S. §780-1 et seq. Appellant contends that (1) The Drug Device and Cosmetic Act is an unconstitutional delegation of the legislative power of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, (2) The Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act is unconstitutionally vague, and (3) the evidentiary chain of custody of the methadone allegedly transferred by appellant was not proven.
I
Appellant first argues that The Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Commonwealth ex rel. McClain v. LockeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
- Holgate Bros. v. BashoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Nester AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Commonwealth v. HarrisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Latella v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Commonwealth v. HowardSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- East Suburban Press, Inc. v. Township of Penn HillsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- State v. GulaSuperior Court of Delaware · 1974
- Commonwealth v. Kishbaugh, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.