Ex parte Engel, 26168

Citation158 Tex.Crim. 95,253 S.W.2d 430
Decision Date17 December 1952
Docket NumberNo. 26168,26168
PartiesEx parte ENGEL.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Martin & Shown, W. E. Martin, Houston, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

Appellant is confined in the county jail of Harris County, Texas under a commitment from the County Court at Law, No. 2 of said county by virtue of her conviction in that court of the violation of Art. 726c, Vernon's Annotated Penal Code.

The complaint and information filed in County Court at Law No. 2 charged appellant with the possession of nembutal, a barbiturate, which had not been delivered to her by a pharmacist upon an original prescription or by a duly licensed practitioner in the course of his practice. She pleaded guilty to this charge before the court without a jury, and judgment was entered assessing her punishment at two years in jail and a fine of $1,000.

This is a collateral attack upon such judgment by way of habeas corpus, the appeal being from an order of the District Judge denying the relief prayed for and remanding appellant to custody following a hearing. The validity of the statute under which appellant was convicted is the sole question presented.

Art. 726c, V.A.P.C. was enacted by the 52nd Legislature in 1951, S.B. 295, Ch. 413, p. 758, Acts 52 Leg., for the purpose (declared in the act) of regulating and controlling the handling, sale, and distribution of barbiturates as defined therein: 'to insure that the public shall receive the therapeutic benefits of barbiturates under medical supervision to the full extent required to assure safety and efficiency in their use', and 'to prevent such handling, sale, or distribution for harmful or illegitimate purposes; and to place upon manufacturers, wholesalers, licensed compounders of prescriptions, and persons prescribing such drugs, a basic responsibility for preventing the improper distribution of such drugs to the extent that such drugs are produced, handled, sold, or prescribed by them.'

Sec. 3(a) of the act makes the delivery of any barbiturate unlawful unless delivered by a pharmacist upon an original prescription in a container labeled as required in subsection (1) or by a practitioner (defined in the act), in the course of his practice, in a container labeled as required in subsection (2) of section 3(a).

Sec. 3(e) of said Art. 726c, V.A.P.C. makes the possession of a barbiturate by any person unlawful unless such person obtained the drug under the provisions of Sec. 3(a)(1) and (2) and possesses it in the container in which it was delivered to him by the pharmacist or practitioner selling or dispensing it.

Section 5 of said Art. 726c, V.A.P.C. reads as follows:

'The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (e) of Section 3 shall not be applicable: (a) to the delivery of barbiturates to persons included in any of the classes hereinafter named, or to the agents or employees of such persons, for use in the usual course of their business or practice or in the performance of their official duties, as the case may be; or (b) to the possession of barbiturates by such persons or their agents or employees for such use:

'(1) Pharmacists;

'(2) Practitioners;

'(3) Persons who procure barbiturates (A) for disposition by or under the supervision of pharmacists or practitioners employed by them; or (B) for the purpose of lawful research, teaching, or testing, and not for resale;

'(4) Hospitals and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Brown v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 6, 1959
    ...holding in Browning v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 273, 276 S.W.2d 522; Nesbit v. State, Tex.Cr.App, 306 S.W.2d 901; and Ex parte Engel, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 95, 253 S.W.2d 430, supports the State's position that the right of a manufacturer or other person authorized to possess a barbiturate is limited t......
  • State v. Meyers
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • July 24, 1959
    ...excuses or exempts the possession of any barbiturate drug in containers without the proper prescription label thereon; Ex parte Engel, 158 Tex.Cr. R. 95, 253 S.W.2d 430; Mays v. State, supra. Appellant therefore correctly states as point three that 'The need of contraband or prohibited drug......
  • Nesbit v. State, 29119
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 29, 1957
    ...statute is unconstitutional. Art. 726c, Vernon's Ann.P.C. was sustained against attacks as to its constitutionality in Ex parte Engel, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 95, 253 S.W.2d 430, and Browning v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 273, 276 S.W.2d 522, certiorari denied 348 U.S. 971, 75 S.Ct. 531, 99 L.Ed. In Browni......
  • Manson v. State, 29808
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 4, 1958
    ...in the statute such as physicians, dentists, etc., are exempt from its provisions. A similar contention was presented in Ex parte Engel, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 95, 253 S.W.2d 430 where this Court held that Art. 726c, V.A.P.C., regulating the handling, sale and distribution of barbiturates was not vo......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT