Plowman v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZAPPALA, Justice.
This matter is before us as a direct appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County holding that Section 13(m) of the Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act, 35 P.S. § 780-113(m), is unconstitutional. 1 Common Pleas Court based its conclusion on its determination that Section 13(m) was promulgated to promote a legitimate state objective but failed to accomplish that objective. Although the Legislature attempted to deter and punish individuals who possess, sell, or deliver drugs, the appropriate criminal punishment would serve as a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Commonwealth v. EdmundsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Commonwealth v. ZettlemoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Maurer v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- James v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by74 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MockaitisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Curtis v. KlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Commonwealth v. BurnsworthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Alexander v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.