Webb v. United States
Decision Date | 03 March 1919 |
Docket Number | No. 370,370 |
Citation | 63 L.Ed. 497,249 U.S. 96,39 S.Ct. 217 |
Parties | WEBB et al. v. UNITED STATES |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Ralph Davis and Ike W. Crabtree, both of Memphis, Tenn., for Webb and another.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Porter, for the United States.
This case involves the provisions of the Harrison Narcotic Drug Act (Act Dec. 17, 1914, c. 1, 38 Stat. 785; Comp. St. §§ 6287g-6287q), considered in United States v. Doremus (No. 367, just decided: 249 U. S. 86, 39 Sup. Ct. 214, 63 L. Ed. 496. The case comes here upon a certificate from the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. From the certificate it appears that Webb and Goldbaum were convicted and sentenced in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Tennessee on a charge of conspiracy (section 37, Penal Code [Act March 4, 1909, c. 321, 35 Stat. 1096; Comp. St. § 10201]) to violate the Harrison Narcotic Law. While the certificate states that the indictment is inartificial, it is certified to be sufficient to support a prosecution upon the theory that Webb and Goldbaum intended to have the latter violate the law by using the order blanks (section 1 of the act) for a prohibited purpose.
The certificate states:
'If section 2, rightly construed, forbids sales to a non-registrable user, and if such prohibition is constitutional, we next meet the question whether such orders as Webb gave to applicants are 'prescription,' within the meaning of exception (b) in section 2.
'We conclude that the case cannot be disposed of without determining the construction and perhaps the constitutionality of the law in certain particulars, and for the purpose of certification, we state the facts as follows assuming, as for this purpose we must do, that whatever the evidence tended to show, in aid of the prosecution, must be taken as a fact:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gonzales v. Oregon
..."legitimate" as a matter of federal law—since that is an interpretation of "prescription" that we ourselves have adopted. Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96 (1919), was a prosecution under the Harrison Act of a doctor who wrote prescriptions of morphine "for the purpose of providing the use......
-
U.S. v. Smith
...... a bona fide physician — patient relationship must exist." White, 399 F.2d at 816-18; see also Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96, 99-100, 39 S.Ct. 217, 63 L.Ed. 497 (1919) (holding under the Harrison Act that when a doctor provided morphine to a habitual user "for the purpose of providi......
-
United States v. Moore, 71-1252.
...the terms "legitimate practice" and "good faith" as used in the Act. In the first of these cases, Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96, 39 S.Ct. 217, 63 L.Ed. 497 (1919), the Supreme Court held that the medical exemption was unavailable to a doctor who had sold drugs and prescriptions indiscr......
-
United Sttaes v. Cortés–Cabán
...303, 66 L.Ed. 619 (1922); Jin Fuey Moy v. United States, 254 U.S. 189, 41 S.Ct. 98, 65 L.Ed. 214 (1920); Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96, 39 S.Ct. 217, 63 L.Ed. 497 (1919). As courts tightened up on those medical treatments they deemed to fall within the legal provisions of the Harrison ......
-
Brief for the petitioners: Gonzales v. State of Oregon *.
...by itself plainly connoted a requirement that the physician be attempting to "treat[]" or "cure" an illness. See Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96, 99-100 (1919) (To call a doctor's order for morphine that was "not ... issued ... in the course of professional treatment in the attempted cur......
-
Whether physician-assisted suicide serves a "legitimate medical purpose" under the Drug Enforcement Administration's regulations implementing the Controlled Substances Act.
...the narcotic drugs mentioned in the act, strictly within the appropriate bounds of a physician's ... pracrice."); Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96, 99-100 (1919) (holding that to call the defendant's order for the use of morphine a "physician's prescription" would "be so plain a perversio......
-
In Memoriam: Ralph Seeley
...the constitutionality of the Harrison Act's tax on physicians and its control over the manner in which drugs could be dispensed. 194. 249 U.S. 96 (1919). Webb upheld the convictions of a physician and a retail druggist who supplied morphine to an addict for the purpose of maintaining rather......
-
Reflections of an Academic Clinical Researcher on the past 40 Years of Addiction Development
...Retrieved April 15, 2009, http://www.druglibrary.org/ schaffer/legal/l1920/united_states_v_behrman.htm.Webb et al. v. United States1919 249 U.S. 96. Retrieved April 15, 2009, http://www.druglibrary.org/ ...