Patterson

People v. Patterson

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 507·72 Cal. App. 4th 438·84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 870·99 Daily Journal DAR 4973·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3922
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 24, 1999C028319California2,365 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

Health and Safety Code section 11379, subdivision (b) makes it illegal to transport for sale specified controlled substances within this state from one county to another noncontiguous county.

In this case, defendant Jeffrey Patterson contends the statute contains a requirement that a defendant who transports such substances must intend to facilitate their sale in the noncontiguous county.

In the published portion of the opinion, we explain why we find no such requirement in the statute and reject defendant’s contention.

A jury convicted defendant of nine drug-related offenses: count I, transportation of methamphetamine for sale between noncontiguous counties (§ 11379, subd. (b)); count II, possession of methamphetamine for sale (§ 11378); count III, possession of marijuana for sale (§ 11359); count IV, transportation of marijuana (§ 11360, subd. (a)); count V, possession of morphine sulfate tablets (§ 11350, subd. (a)); count VI, transportation and/or sale of morphine sulfate tablets (§ 11352, subd. (a)); count VII, possession of diazepam for sale (§ 11375, subd. (b)); count VIII, possession- of drug paraphernalia (methamphetamine pipe), a misdemeanor (§ 11364); and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.