State v. Nelson
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
ARNOLD, Judge.
Defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion to dismiss upon the grounds that G.S. 90-18 is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. We disagree with this contention.
G.S. 90-18 provides in part:
No person shall practice medicine or surgery, or any of the branches thereof, nor in any case prescribe for the cure of diseases unless he shall have been first licensed and registered so to do in the manner provided in this Article. . . .
The statute defines the phrase “practice medicine or surgery” as follows:
Any person shall be regarded as practicing…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. MazurieSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- State v. . BakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- State v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. HowardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- State v. HoffmanUtah Supreme Court · 1987
- Central Carolina Nissan, Inc. v. SturgisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990