-
ON REHEARING
CATES, Presiding Judge. Appellant contends that we have said that, as to marihuana, the Controlled Substances Act is ambiguous. This, if true, would lead to its being void for vagueness.
We do not agree. The writer’s opinion may have indulged in convolutions. However, the Act is, if anything, overexplicit in this area.
In other words, it prohibits possession of both “marihuana” and THC. The indictment was for possessing “marijuana.”
Application overruled.
All the Judges concur.
Document Info
Docket Number: 6 Div. 667
Citation Numbers: 312 So. 2d 406, 54 Ala. App. 714
Judges: Bookout, Cates, DeCARLO, Harris, Tyson
Filed Date: 2/4/1975
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 8/24/2023