United States v. Moore

In United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 122 (1975), the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a physician for how he prescribed drugs based on a jury instruction that "it had to find ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that a physician, who knowingly or intentionally, did dispense or distribute [methadone] by prescription, did so other than in good faith for detoxification in the usual course of a professional practice and in accordance with a standard of medical practice generally recognized and accepted in the United States.’" Id. at 138-39 (emphasis added). The Moore jury was thus expressly instructed to convict or acquit based on its finding about good faith. See also United States v. Linder, 268 U.S. 5, 18 (1925) (acquittal required if the jury found that defendant-physician acted “in good faith” in prescribing narcotics).

It is generally required to give a jury a "good faith" instruction when it deliberates on criminal charges against a physician for his prescription of controlled substances. When that "good faith" instruction is lacking in a criminal trial, on appeal the defendant is likely to cite the Moore precedent.