Case ID: del_30/html/0226-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Boyce, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

State vs. John Rothman.
    Poisons—Statutory Regulations—“Dispose of.”
    One who, owning and having in his possession a compound of morphine, permits another to have or use it, “disposes of” it in contravention of Rev. Code 1915, § 3595..
    
      (November 18, 1918.)
    Boyce, J., sitting.
    
      P. Warren Green, Deputy Attorney-General, for the State.
    
      James Saulsbury for the accused.
    Court- of General Sessions, New Castle County,
    November Term, 1918.
    Indictment No. 90,
    November Term, 1918.
    John Rothman was indicted and tried for violating the Drug Act, Rev. Code 1915, § 3595. Verdict guilty. See State v. Handy, ante, 105 Atl. 426.
    
      The statute provides:
    “Whoever shall sell, or in any way dispose of to any person, morphine, opium, cocaine, chloral-hydrate, or any of their compounds, except to a licensed physician, or on the authority of a certificate ot such licensed physician. * sjs * >>
    
    The count in the indictment relied on charged that John Rothman unlawfully did dispose of by furnishing to one John Barnes a compound of morphine, commonly called heroin. * * *
    The proof was that Barnes and Rothman roomed together; that the latter owned, had in his possession and used heroin in his room; that on the twenty-eighth day of September, A. D. 1918, Barnes, in their room, in the presence of, and with the knowledge and acquiescence of Rothman took a “shot’ ’ of heroin in his arm by means of a hypodermic needle which also belonged to Rothman. Barnes was not a licensed physician, nor did he have the authority of a certificate of a physician for procuring the heroin from Rothman.
    It was shown by expert testimony that heroin is a compound or morphine.
    When the Deputy Attorney-General rested, counsel for the accused moved for binding instructions to the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on the ground that the State had failed to show that Rothman owned the heroin used by Barnes or that he either sold or disposed of heroin to Barnes. The case was submitted to the jury without further testimony after the charge of the court.
   Boyce, J.,

charged the jury in part:

Whoever has heroin in his possession and permits another, not being a licensed physician, or without the authority of a certificate of a duly licensed physician, to have or use heroin, unlawfully disposes of the same within legislative intendment. If you find from the evidence that Rothman owned and had heroin in his possession in the room occupied by him and Barnes, and knowingly in his presence permitted Barnes to use it in his arm, then Rothman disposed of the poisonous drug within the meaning of and contrary to the statute. * * *

Verdict guilty.