We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
PRESUMPTIONS.
- Abstract
The article presents information about a court's decision regarding presumptions. The article here refers to the Miller versus State case. The defendant was convicted of making an unlawful sale of cocaine to a Negro boy. He appeals on the ground that the state did not prove that the sale was not made to a legally licensed physician or dentist, or upon a physician's prescription. The court had held that if the sale was made upon a prescription, the fact is peculiarly within the knowledge of the defendant, and consequently he should prove it. It is presumed that what is common in general, prevails in particular, and a fact, the existence of which is once shown continues. As the right to practice medicine and dentistry is granted only to exceptional persons, and not to the mass of the people, and as the Negro boy was not a licensed physician or dentist at birth, there is a double, prima facie presumption that he was not a licensed physician or dentist at the time of the sale. This presumption is sufficient to support the state's case.
- Subjects
PRESUMPTIONS (Law); LEGAL judgments; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); COCAINE; MEDICAL prescriptions; LEGAL evidence
- Publication
Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law & Criminology, 1914, Vol 4, Issue 5, p745
- ISSN
0885-4173
- Publication type
Article