In a prosecution against pharmacy employees for dispensing unlawful controlled substances, one defendant's conviction is affirmed where: 1) Gonzales v. Oregon did not apply because there was no interpretive rule seeking to define a practice as lacking any legitimate medical purpose; and 2) the government adduced sufficient proof at trial that defendant's practices were not within the usual course of professional pharmaceutical practice. However, another defendant's conviction is reversed where there was no evidence that he knew the pharmacy's managers and pharmacists filled prescriptions issued without a legitimate medical purpose or in defiance of professional standards.
Filed September 9, 2009
Opinion by Judge Gorsuch
Lee Thompson, Thompson Law Firm, LLC, Wichita, KS
Marietta Parker, Acting United States Attorney, Wichita, KS