A helpful colleague made sure I did not miss yesterday's notable new ruling from a Third Circuit panel in US v. Semler, No. 19-2319 (3d Cir. Jun. 1, 2021) (available here). This split (non-precedential?) decision address the persistently problematic issue of when and how social sharing of drugs constitutes distribution and all of the potentially severe consequences that can follow. Here is how the majority opinion authored by Judge Roth gets started:
Emma Semler is an addict who bought and injected heroin with a fellow user, then failed to intervene as that user overdosed and died. She now appeals her conviction and sentence under the Controlled Substances Act for distribution of heroin resulting in death, a charge that carries a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty years’ imprisonment.
We hold that the definition of “distribute” under the Controlled Substances Act does not cover individuals who jointly and simultaneously acquire possession of a small amount of a controlled substance solely for their personal use. Because a reasonable jury could find that Semler and the decedent jointly acquired possession of the heroin in question for their personal use, we will vacate Semler’s conviction and remand this case for a new trial so that the jury can be instructed on the correct legal standard.
The dissent authored by Judge Porter starts this way:
The Controlled Substances Act prohibits the distribution of certain drugs. In that statute, Congress carefully defined the meaning of “distribute.” Dissatisfied with the breadth of Congress’s handiwork, the majority vacates Emma Semler’s judgment of conviction. It holds that Semler did not “actually transfer” heroin when she handed it to Jennifer Werstler. Because that “is flatly contrary to standard English usage” and contradicts our Court’s precedent, I respectfully dissent. Kansas v. Garcia, 140 S. Ct. 791, 802 (2020).
A few prior posts on drug-causing-death prosecutions and punishments:
- "Heroin, Murder, and the New Front in the War on Drugs"
- Noticing how federal drug laws, rather than state homicide laws, are used to severely punish drug distribution resulting in death
- "America’s Favorite Antidote: Drug-Induced Homicide in the Age of the Overdose Crisis"
- Another look at trend to prosecute some opioid overdose deaths as homicides
- "Drug-Induced Homicide Defense Toolkit"
- "An Overdose Death Is Not Murder: Why Drug-Induced Homicide Laws Are Counterproductive and Inhumane"
No comments:
Post a Comment