CNN TV
SCHEDULE ANCHORS & REPORTERS CONTACT US HLN


September 30, 2010

Judge decides all counts will go to the jury in Anna Nicole Smith case

Posted: 10:16 AM ET

 

Los Angeles, CA – After going over jury instructions for the better part of three days, and arguing a defense motion for acquittal, Judge Robert Perry determined all 11 counts in the case of California v. Sandeep Kapoor, Khristine Eroshevich and Howard K. Stern will go to the jury saying that after consulting with a respected judge, he decided to listen to the advice, and to have faith in the jury system.

Although Judge Perry will allow a 12 member deliberating panel to determine the numerous questions of fact in the case, he did grant Howard K. Stern’s motion for acquittal as to counts 6 and 8.

The prosecution had alleged in count 6 that between the dates of August 18, 2006 and September 22, 2006, Kapoor and Stern had obtained a prescription for opiates by fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.

In count 8 the prosecution had alleged that between August 18, 2006 and September 22, 2006, Kapoor and Stern obtained a prescription for opiates by giving a false name or address.

Counts 6 and 8 will remain as to Dr. Sandeep Kapoor.

In count 2, Judge Perry granted the defense motion for acquittal only as to one portion of the conspiracy charge involving defendant's Stern and Kapoor.

Acquittal is granted as to allegations that Stern and Kapoor conspired to obtain a controlled substance by false name or address.
The remainder of count 2 as to these two defendants will go to the jury as charged.

Judge Perry cited as his reasoning that there was not sufficient evidence that Stern committed or intended to commit the target offense of obtaining or conspiring to obtain a prescription in a false name during those dates in question. Where is the evidence Judge Perry said, that Stern knew it was wrong to have medications in multiple names?

Following Wednesday’s outcome, Kapoor will have six charges that go to the jury, Eroshevich will also have six charges and Stern will have nine charges instead of 11.

The two doctors and former partner of Anna Nicole Smith are charged with conspiring to commit crimes which include unlawfully prescribing, administering and dispensing controlled substances to Smith. Prosecutors say the defendants who are also accused of pharmacy shopping, knew Smith, who died in February 2007 was an addict.

The defendants say their actions were all done in good faith, always acting in Smith’s best interest and served a legitimate medical purpose. They say Smith was not an addict but suffered from chronic pain and emotional pain which required medication. Medication prescribed in alternate names was merely to protect Smith’s privacy.

Closing arguments in the case will begin Monday October 4, 2010. Make sure you stay with In Session for all the latest updates!

-Jean Casarez, In Session Correspondent

Filed under: Anna Nicole Smith death • Case Updates


Share this on:
Plain Clothes Hero   September 30th, 2010 10:42 am ET

Interesting.....good luck to the jury in deliberation. I personally feel that this case was based more on circumstanstial evidence and the "feelings" of the prosecutors more so than anything. I think the jury is going to have a hard time.


Linda   September 30th, 2010 6:23 pm ET

Now, if Anna Nicole Smith was alive, would she be charged as well? She chose to take these drugs...


jerry jones   September 30th, 2010 10:50 pm ET

I think Howard Sterns guilt runs a lot deeper than just prescription drugs this guy was a dirty money grubber.


solange   September 30th, 2010 10:53 pm ET

"Where is the evidence Judge Perry said, that Stern knew it was wrong to have medications in multiple names?" How about herein lies the conspiracy? As an attorney, how could Stern NOT have known that is wrong to have medications in multiple names? Anna Nicole was Stern's payday and he exploited her to the hilt for years, and should be punished along with Kapoor and Eroshevich. At the very least they should lose their professional licenses.


MICHAEL   October 1st, 2010 12:06 am ET

Hmmmm I just don't understand how the defense can argue that these medicines / drugs were ordered and or given to Anna Nicole Smith under alternate names was to protect Anna's privacy.........I was under the impression that the Doctor / pharmacist confidentiallity rule would have protected Anna's privacy. Unless information was sold to a news / magazine agency, who would know and or care ?


Judy   October 1st, 2010 10:19 am ET

Not too much has been said about what Anna Nicole was going through when she appeared "drugged" during the last part of her life.
She had suddenly lost her only son, while she was pregnant with her daughter. She was mourning as anyone would be. She had dreams about her son at night....she was in agony. Howard loved Anna Nicole and was willing to be a father figure to the baby and he supported her through her grief.
Leave this man alone....he has been through enough.


heather,elliott   October 1st, 2010 3:13 pm ET

howard.stern.was,the,enabler,giving,anna,nicole,drugs,all,alone,and,has,been,the,enabler.geeting.her.drugs


jimanddee   October 1st, 2010 6:50 pm ET

I'm not an attorney or a doctor, but even I know it is against the law to obtain prescriptions under alternate names and addresses. I hope the jurers know this also, and do not give them sympathy votes like the judicial system does for idiots like Paris, Lindsey and "good ole Charlie Sheen"


jj   October 1st, 2010 7:48 pm ET

It's obvious how somebody acts when they have been drugged..... Did anyone see the video's of Anna or was it just me????


noodlemonkey   October 1st, 2010 8:48 pm ET

I agree with the others who fully believe that Stern and these doctors knowingly participated in a conspiracy to procure drugs under multiple names. It seems like a no-brainer to me.


Mary   October 7th, 2010 1:05 am ET

I think alot of people do not understand addiction and how your body gets used to the drugs and you need higher and higher doses to get relief from symptoms. She was kicked down by her late husband's son and had been in and out of court for years in that case, I'm sure she needed medications for depression and anxiety for that alone. Nothing has been said about the conditions she had that required narcotics, It is very easy to take too much just trying to get rid of the pain. I know in my heart she was hurting and very sad over her son's death and conflicted with the joy of a new baby. She was even trying to put the biological father out of her life and begin a new one with Stern. I believe he loved her very much and lives everyday knowing he got the meds for her at her request never realizing she would take enough at one time to overdose. This is a tragedy not a conspiracy or murder. All the lawyers invloved are trying to get as much as they can from her estate, they are the ones who should be ahamed of themselves and the authorities too, there must be some money in it for them too.


Leave Your Comment


 

Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

 This is your online home for In Session on truTV’s up-to-the minute, comprehensive coverage of legal issues, trials and news from America’s courtrooms.  Our anchors, analysts and producers are teaming up here to give you updates on the stories that matter to you.

Be sure to tune in to In Session on truTV from 9 a.m. – 3 p.m. ET.

On Twitter
Millionaire gets 16 years for DUI death… at home http://t.co/gwG63gdh John Goodman to be released from jail on $7M bond
Twitter icon HLNTV 6:30 am ET May 16, 2012 RETWEET
.
RT @drdrewhln: Jose Baez: I was Casey’s harshest critic - Take a look at this - http://t.co/9rVf6vbR #CaseyAnthony
Twitter icon HLNTV 6:05 am ET May 16, 2012 RETWEET
.
Deliberations in the #TammiSmith case has ended for the evening. They deliberated for 1-hour, 14 minutes, 53 seconds. They are set to...
Twitter icon InSession 7:33 pm ET May 15, 2012 RETWEET
.
@conniegail421 There are enough. Originally there were 9, but only 8 jurors can deliberate.
Twitter icon InSession 7:16 pm ET May 15, 2012 RETWEET
.
#TammiSmith: RT @bethkaras: The jury started to deliberate at 3:15 pm local time (6:15 pm ET). One of the four men was selected as the......
Twitter icon InSession 7:14 pm ET May 15, 2012 RETWEET
.
Contact us
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP