Court Opinion

ID: 9568692
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:06:39.446728+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:56:06.567346
License: Public Domain

’ELLETT, Justice
(dissenting).
I dissent. The statutes are too clear for me to see any conflict whatever between them. Title 58, Chapter 33, U.C.A.1953, is known as the Drug Abuse Control Law. It in substance-'provides that initial violations of its provisions amount to an indictable misdemeanor,' and ;it sets forth the punishment therefor -in. Sec. 58-33-4. However, it further provides bySec. 58-33-6(gJ, that if a violation of one of its provisions is also a violation, of the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act- (Title 58, Chapter 13a), then the punishment will be under the latter (a- felony) and not under the former (an indictable misdemeanor).
The same legislature which passed the Drug Abuse Control.Act also amended the Uniform Narcotic .Drug Act so as to include a prohibition .against the possession and so forth of LSD-25 1
It, therefore, seems obvious to me that all the world must know and understand what the punishment for'unlawful'possession of-LSD is. I would affirm the judgment and sentence of the trial court.

. The figure 25 indicates simply the date of discovery of the drug and does not . purport' .to indicate any different form of drug other than LSD.