Minnesota ex Rel. Whipple v. Martinson,
256 U.S. 41 (1921)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Minnesota ex Rel. Whipple v. Martinson, 256 U.S. 41 (1921)

Minnesota ex Rel. Whipple v. Martinson

No. 224

Argued March 17, 1921

Decided April 11, 1921

256 U.S. 41


1. Minnesota Laws, 1915, c. 260, regulating the administration, sale and possession of morphine and other narcotic drugs, held consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment. P. 256 U. S. 45.

2. The presence in the law of a provision interpreted by the state courts as forbidding physicians to furnish these drugs to drug addicts otherwise than through prescriptions does not bring it into

Page 256 U. S. 42

conflict with the federal "Anti-Narcotic" Revenue Act, not containing such restriction, since it does not prevent enforcement of the federal act. P. 256 U. S. 45.

144 Minn. 20 affirmed.

Writ of error to review a judgment of the Supreme Court of Minnesota which affirmed an order of a trial court of the state discharging a writ of habeas corpus sued out by the relator, Whipple, for the purpose of testing the validity of his sentence for violation of the state law concerning hypnotic drugs. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 256 U. S. 43

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.