Summary
A 2013 ruling by the California Supreme Court upheld a conviction related to the possession and sale of MDMA. This decision was rendered despite the absence of expert witness testimony. The court instead applied judicial notice, referencing established scientific treatises to officially classify the substance in question.
Summary
In a 2013 case, the California Supreme Court upheld a conviction for MDMA possession and sale. This decision was reached despite the absence of expert testimony, as the court applied judicial notice of scientific treatises to classify the substance.
Summary
In 2013, the California Supreme Court upheld a conviction for possessing and selling MDMA. This ruling was made even though no expert testimony was presented. The court instead used judicial notice of scientific writings to determine the nature of the substance.
Summary
In 2013, California's highest court looked at a case. The court decided that a person was correctly found guilty of having and selling the drug MDMA. This decision was made even though no expert spoke in court about the drug. Instead, the court used trusted science books to understand what the drug was.