ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

21 U.S.C. § 813 — Treatment of controlled substance analogues

submitted 40 years ago by Pub. L. 91-513 to r/title-21-FOOD-AND-DRUGS · 220 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

A controlled-substance analogue intended for human consumption is treated as a Schedule I controlled substance for federal-law purposes. The section lists factors that may help determine intended use and says lack of marketing for human use alone is not enough to prove the substance was not intended for that use.

(a) In general. To the extent a controlled-substance analogue is intended for human consumption, every federal law treats it as a Schedule I controlled substance.

(b) Determination. To decide whether the analogue was intended for human consumption, decision makers may consider these factors and any other relevant factors: (1) how it was marketed, advertised, and labeled; (2) its known effectiveness or usefulness for the purpose stated in the marketing, advertising, or label; (3) the difference between its selling price and the usual price of the substance it claims or is advertised to be; (4) diversion from legitimate channels and secret importation, manufacture, or distribution; (5) whether the defendant knew or should have known it was meant to be consumed by injection, inhalation, ingestion, or another immediate method; and (6) whether it was made, formulated, sold, distributed, or marketed to avoid existing drug laws.

(c) Limitation. The fact that a substance was not marketed, advertised, or labeled for human consumption, by itself, is not enough to establish that it was not intended for human consumption.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain
(a) In general

A controlled substance analogue shall, to the extent intended for human consumption, be treated, for the purposes of any Federal law as a controlled substance in schedule I.

(b) Determination

In determining whether a controlled substance analogue was intended for human consumption under subsection (a), the following factors may be considered, along with any other relevant factors:

(1)

The marketing, advertising, and labeling of the substance.

(2)

The known efficacy or usefulness of the substance for the marketed, advertised, or labeled purpose.

(3)

The difference between the price at which the substance is sold and the price at which the substance it is purported to be or advertised as is normally sold.

(4)

The diversion of the substance from legitimate channels and the clandestine importation, manufacture, or distribution of the substance.

(5)

Whether the defendant knew or should have known the substance was intended to be consumed by injection, inhalation, ingestion, or any other immediate means.

(6)

Any controlled substance analogue that is manufactured, formulated, sold, distributed, or marketed with the intent to avoid the provisions of existing drug laws.

(c) Limitation

For purposes of this section, evidence that a substance was not marketed, advertised, or labeled for human consumption, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish that the substance was not intended for human consumption.

Source credit: (Pub. L. 91–513, title II, § 203, as added Pub. L. 99–570, title I, § 1202, Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3207–13; amended Pub. L. 100–690, title VI, § 6470(c), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4378; Pub. L. 115–271, title III, § 3241, Oct. 24, 2018, 132 Stat. 3950.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 1986Enacted · Pub. L. 91-513 · 100 Stat. 3207
  • 1988Amended · Pub. L. 100-690 · 102 Stat. 4378
  • 2018Amended · Pub. L. 115-271 · 132 Stat. 3950

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 91-513 on 1986-10-27.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case