Distribute as a practitioner a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance, except under an order form as required by § 5-64-307;
Acquire or obtain possession of a controlled substance by misrepresentation, fraud, forgery, deception, subterfuge, or theft;
Furnish false or fraudulent material information in or omit any material information from any record, application, report, or other document required to be kept or filed under this chapter;
Make, distribute, or possess any punch, die, plate, stone, or other thing designed to print, imprint, or reproduce the trademark, trade name, or other identifying mark, imprint, or device of another person or any likeness of any trademark, trade name, or other identifying mark, imprint, or device of another person upon any drug or container or labeling of a drug or container so as to render the drug a counterfeit substance; or
Agree, consent, or in any manner offer to unlawfully sell, furnish, transport, administer, or give any controlled substance to any person or to arrange for any action described in this subdivision (a)(5)(A), and then to substitute a noncontrolled substance in lieu of the controlled substance bargained for.
The proffer of a controlled substance creates a rebuttable presumption of knowingly agreeing, consenting, or offering to sell, furnish, transport, administer, or give a noncontrolled substance that does not require additional showing of specific purpose to substitute a noncontrolled substance.
A person who violates:
Subdivision (a)(1), subdivision (a)(2), subdivision (a)(3), or subdivision (a)(4) of this section upon conviction is guilty of a Class D felony; or
Subdivision (a)(5) of this section with respect to a noncontrolled substance represented to be a controlled substance classified in:
Schedule I or Schedule II upon conviction is guilty of a Class C felony;
Schedule III, Schedule IV, or Schedule V upon conviction is guilty of a Class D felony; or
Schedule VI upon conviction is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
A second or subsequent offense of attempt to violate subdivision (a)(1), subdivision (a)(2), subdivision (a)(3), or subdivision (a)(4) of this section is a Class D felony.
“This act shall be known as the ‘Arkansas Methamphetamine Lab Act of 1999’.”
Acts 2011, No. 570, § 1, provided: “The intent of this act is to implement comprehensive measures designed to reduce recidivism, hold offenders accountable, and contain correction costs.”
Acts 2013, No. 1192, § 1, did not make changes to this section.
Publisher's Notes.
As enacted, Acts 2005, No. 1994, contained two sections designated as § 305. The two sections were subsequently designated § 305[A] and § 305[B].
Amendments.
The 2001 amendment added the subdivision designations in (c)(1)-(3); added the last sentence in (c)(2)(A); inserted “subdivision (c)(2)(A) of” in (c)(2)(B); added (c)(3)(B); and made minor stylistic changes throughout.
The 2009 amendment substituted “a person knowingly” for “any person knowingly or intentionally” in (a).
The 2011 amendment rewrote the section.
The 2013 amendment by No. 1192, § 2 added (c).
Research References
ALR.
Validity, Construction, and Application of State Trademark Counterfeiting Statutes. 63 A.L.R.6th 303.
Ark. L. Rev.
Case Note, Harbison v. State: Just Say No to a Usable Amount, 45 Ark. L. Rev. 425.
U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.
Legislative Survey, Criminal Law, 4 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 583.
Legislation of the 1983 General Assembly, Criminal Law, 6 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 613.
Case Notes
Fraudulent Prescription.
In a prosecution for obtaining a controlled substance with a fraudulent prescription even though the substance in the prescription bottle was not chemically tested, testimony of a licensed pharmacist that he filled prescription bottle from his larger container of controlled substance was sufficient to sustain conviction. Armstrong v. State, 5 Ark. App. 96, 633 S.W.2d 51 (1982).
Substitution of Noncontrolled Substance.
Evidence sufficient to support conviction of defendant who represented counterfeit pills to be amphetamines. Honea v. State, 15 Ark. App. 382, 695 S.W.2d 391 (1985).
Baker v. Norris, 255 S.W.3d 466 (Ark. 2007). · cites it 15דOn October 29, 2004, an amended judgment and commitment order was entered by the circuit court, reflecting that Baker had negotiated a plea of guilty to the offense of possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of Ark. Code Ann. §…”
White v. State, 255 S.W.3d 881 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 23דThe appellant was charged with and convicted of possession with intent to use drug paraphernalia, as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c) (Repl. 2005) as follows, in pertinent part: (c) Dmg Paraphernalia.”
Jones v. State, 182 S.W.3d 485 (Ark. 2004). · cites it 12ד2003) and a class C felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (Supp.2003) and a class C felony.”
Moore v. State, 761 S.W.2d 894 (Ark. 1988). · cites it 8דArk. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(l) (1987). Appellants contend that our code provisions fail for want of “certainty” or “definiteness” and that they do not give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden.”
Cluck v. State, 226 S.W.3d 780 (Ark. 2006). · cites it 4ד]” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(2)(A) (Supp.”
Morgan v. State, 308 S.W.3d 147 (Ark. 2009). · cites it 4דFurthermore, he was found to be in violation of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (Supp. 2007), which states, in pertinent part, that “[i]t is unlawful for any person to use, or to possess with intent to use, drug paraphernalia to manufacture methamphetamine.”
Walley v. State, 112 S.W.3d 349 (Ark. 2003). · cites it 3ד” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(2)(A) (Supp.”
State v. Zawodniak, 946 S.W.2d 936 (Ark. 1997). · cites it 8ד1993), and with possession of drug paraphernalia under Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (Repl. 1993). Zawodniak waived a jury trial, and was tried at a bench trial on March 11, 1996.”
Cluck v. State, 209 S.W.3d 428 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 8דArk. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(5) (Supp.2003).”
Autrey v. State, 204 S.W.3d 84 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 7דArk. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(5) (Supp. 2003).”
Cox v. State, 229 S.W.3d 883 (Ark. 2006). · cites it 4דArk.Code Ann § 5-64-403(c)(5)(Supp.2003).”
Matheney v. Commonwealth, 191 S.W.3d 599 (Ky. 2006). · cites it 2דThe closest statute to ours is Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c) which criminalizes the possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use it in the manufacture of methamphetamine.”
White v. State, 255 S.W.3d 881 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007). “The appellant was charged with and convicted of possession with intent to use drug paraphernalia, as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c) (Repl. 2005) as follows, in pertinent part: (c) Dmg Paraphernalia.”
Matheney v. Commonwealth, 191 S.W.3d 599 (Ky. 2006). “The closest statute to ours is Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c) which criminalizes the possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use it in the manufacture of methamphetamine.”
Moore v. State, 761 S.W.2d 894 (Ark. 1988). “Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(l) (1987). Appellants contend that our code provisions fail for want of “certainty” or “definiteness” and that they do not give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden.”
Jones v. State, 182 S.W.3d 485 (Ark. 2004). “2003) and a class C felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (Supp.2003) and a class C felony.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c)(1)(A)(i) — 1 case
White v. State, 255 S.W.3d 881 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007). “The appellant was charged with and convicted of possession with intent to use drug paraphernalia, as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c) (Repl. 2005) as follows, in pertinent part: (c) Dmg Paraphernalia.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c)(1)(A)(ii) — 1 case
White v. State, 255 S.W.3d 881 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007). “The appellant was charged with and convicted of possession with intent to use drug paraphernalia, as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c) (Repl. 2005) as follows, in pertinent part: (c) Dmg Paraphernalia.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c)(1)(B) — 1 case
White v. State, 255 S.W.3d 881 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007). “The appellant was charged with and convicted of possession with intent to use drug paraphernalia, as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c) (Repl. 2005) as follows, in pertinent part: (c) Dmg Paraphernalia.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c)(2)(A) — 2 cases
Cluck v. State, 226 S.W.3d 780 (Ark. 2006). “]” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(2)(A) (Supp.”
Walley v. State, 112 S.W.3d 349 (Ark. 2003). “” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(2)(A) (Supp.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403(c)(5) — 9 cases
Baker v. Norris, 255 S.W.3d 466 (Ark. 2007). “On October 29, 2004, an amended judgment and commitment order was entered by the circuit court, reflecting that Baker had negotiated a plea of guilty to the offense of possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of Ark. Code Ann. §…”
Cox v. State, 229 S.W.3d 883 (Ark. 2006). “Ark.Code Ann § 5-64-403(c)(5)(Supp.2003).”
Morgan v. State, 308 S.W.3d 147 (Ark. 2009). “Furthermore, he was found to be in violation of Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (Supp. 2007), which states, in pertinent part, that “[i]t is unlawful for any person to use, or to possess with intent to use, drug paraphernalia to manufacture methamphetamine.”
Moore v. State, 761 S.W.2d 894 (Ark. 1988). “Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-403 (c)(l) (1987). Appellants contend that our code provisions fail for want of “certainty” or “definiteness” and that they do not give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.