TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Gregory Lamear, Donald L. McEntire Phyllis Sparks

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gregory LAMEAR, Donald L. McEntire, Appellant, Phyllis Sparks

United States v. Lamear, 417 F.2d 626 (8th Cir. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 5, 1969
Docket
No. 19605
Judges
Matthes, Blackmun, Bright
Citations
417 F.2d 6261969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10170

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Appellant and his codefendants Gregory Lamear and Phyllis Sparks pleaded guilty to possessing and selling a quantity of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), a “depressant or stimulant drug” within 21 U.S.C. § 321 (v) (3), in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 331 (q) (2) and 331(q) (3) (A). Lemear and Sparks did not appeal.

Appellant seeks review of his conviction contending, as he did in the district court, that 21 U.S.C. §§ 331 (q) (2) and 331(q) (3) (A), part of the Drug Abuse Control Amendments of 1965, Pub.L. No. 89-74, 79 Stat. 232, to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938, 21 U.S. C. §§ 301-392, are unconstitutional. His position is that Congress acted in excess of the power delegated to it under the commerce clause of the United States Constitution in that the amendments have the effect of regulating and proscribing intrastate transactions.

The substance of appellant’s argument has been rejected by this and other courts. United States v. Funk, 412 F.2d 452 (8th Cir. 1969); White v. United States, 399 F.2d 813 (8th Cir. 1968); Whalen v. United States, 398 F.2d 286 (8th Cir. 1968); United States v. Cerrito, 413 F.2d 1270 (7th Cir., July 25, 1969); Deyo v. United States, 396 F.2d 595 (9th Cir. 1968); White v. United States, 395 F.2d 5 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 928 , 89 S.Ct. 260 , 21 L.Ed.2d 266 (1968); United States v. Freeman, 275 F.Supp. 803 (N.D.Ill.1967).

We remain firm in our view that the law under attack is not subject to any constitutional infirmities.

The judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1971: 21972: 119712026peak 1971 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Frank James Stevens v. United States440 F.2d 144 (6th Cir. 1971)
  2. James Cody v. United States460 F.2d 34 (8th Cir. 1972)
  3. United States v. Gerald Franklin Smith452 F.2d 404 (8th Cir. 1971)

Most recent

  1. James Cody v. United States460 F.2d 34 (8th Cir. 1972)
  2. United States v. Gerald Franklin Smith452 F.2d 404 (8th Cir. 1971)
  3. Frank James Stevens v. United States440 F.2d 144 (6th Cir. 1971)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 7

DepthCaseCited by
White v. United States, 399 F.2d 813 (8th Cir. 1968) 58
United States v. Cerrito, 413 F.2d 1270 (7th Cir. 1969) 31
White v. United States, 395 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1968) 29
Deyo v. United States, 396 F.2d 595 (9th Cir. 1968) 15
United States v. Funk, 412 F.2d 452 (8th Cir. 1969) 13
Whalen v. United States, 398 F.2d 286 (8th Cir. 1968) 5
United States v. Freeman, 275 F. Supp. 803 (N.D. Ill. 1967) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list