Commonwealth v. HILL
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Spaeth, J.:
I quite agree with the President Judge, that when the legislature prohibited “. . . selling, [and] trafficking in, any dangerous or narcotic drug,” presumably it meant *581to refer to two different kinds of conduct. That conclusion, however, does not solve the problem put to us by the present case; for if the legislature intended to prohibit not only “selling” but also “trafficking,” why did it not provide a penalty not only for “selling” but also for “trafficking”?
In fact, it did not, as Judge Hoffman points out. I therefore cannot join the President Judge in his…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mollendorf v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1946
- State v. LermenyOregon Supreme Court · 1958
- People v. GwyerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958