Constitutionality of Conviction under Narcotics Possession Statute
anon,
Citation analytics
How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this journal article
Most recently cited by3
- 1976State v. Rentfrow Wash. Ct. App.
- 1970State v. Zornes Wash.
- 1966State v. Canady Wash.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Abstract
Defendant was convicted of the felony of possession of a narcotic without a prescription, and was sentenced to serve a maximum term of twenty years. Defendant claimed that, on the same facts, the prosecutor could have charged the defendant with the gross misdemeanor of illegal use of narcotic drugs. Defendant argued that this vests discretion in the prosecutor to charge either a felony or a gross misdemeanor, and that this discretion is violative of the equal protection clauses of the Washington and United States constitutions. On appeal, the Washington Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.
Held: The gross misdemeanor of illegal use of a narcotic, and the felony of illegal possession of a narcotic, require different elements of proof and the prosecutor may, at his discretion, charge either or both crimes on the same set of facts without violating defendant's constitutional right to equal protection. State v. Reid, 66 Wash. Dec. 2d 231, 401 P.2d 988 (1965).