Court Opinion

ID: 9641821
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:40:57.931355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:39.992601
License: Public Domain

Steele Hays, Justice, dissenting. I concur entirely in the dissenting opinion of Justice Glaze, in which I join. The Uniform Controlled Substances Act defines “delivery” as including the “constructive transfer” of drugs. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-101 (1987). I submit that when a practicing physician repeatedly prescribes drugs for individuals who avowedly have no medical need and who tell him they want the drugs to sell, or for a husband who drives a truck, or for a boyfriend, those are palpably constructive transfers and are a violation of our statute. A paramount purpose of uniform acts is to give consistency and uniformity to the law. Yet the majority rejects an interpretation of our act in a manner consistent with that of other courts, preferring a narrow interpretation that strains both common usage and common sense. I respectfully dissent. Hickman, J., and Glaze, J., join this dissent.