Controlled substances – distribution — sufficiency of the evidence

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Controlled substances – distribution — sufficiency of the evidence

Where a doctor administered large doses of controlled substances outside the normal course of his medical practice, the evidence was sufficient to convict him of distributing a controlled substance unlawfully.

“Obviously, the facts here do not fall within these more common ‘drug pusher’ cases: Pellmann was not charged with prescribing controlled substances to hundreds of patients, conducting perfunctory examinations, or issuing cookie-cutter prescriptions. Still, there was certainly ample evidence, considered together, for a reasonable jury to determine that Pellmann acted outside of his professional practice and not for a legitimate medical purpose, including: (1) during 2009, Pellmann ordered 30 times his previous average, annual needs of fentanyl and morphine for his entire practice, all of the excess going to Evans; (2) Pellmann regularly administered fentanyl and morphine to Evans at her home and at Pellmann’s home, both of which resembled (for lack of a better description) drug houses; (3) Pellmann maintained no records of distribution of drugs to Evans or his treatment of her, including his apparently concocted diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia; (4) Pellmann’s treatment of Evans was wholly outside his use of fentanyl and morphine in his professional practice; (5) Pellmann’s employees were kept in the dark about his claimed treatment of Evans; and (6) following his arrest and initial arraignment, Pellmann again took Evans to a hotel and administered drugs in direct violation of a court order. As detailed in Part I of this opinion, this evidence is not only sufficient to support the jury’s conviction, it is overwhelming.”

Affirmed.

10-3626 U.S. v. Pellman

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Clevert, J., Conley, J.