Whether the Court of Appeals erred by holding a jury could rationally conclude that defendant pharmacist abdicated his duty under §§ 1306.04(a) & 841(a)(1), despite pharmacist's argument that there were 'legitimate medical purposes' for the controlled substance prescriptions he filled because trial witnesses testified that they had real injuries and medical needs requiring medication before pharmacist filled their prescriptions

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED STATEMENT BEFORE QUESTION After defendant pharmacist Lonnie W. Hubbard was charged in an indictment by the U.S. Attorney's Office for allegedly illegally dispensing controlled substance prescriptions in violation of 21 C.F.R. § 1306.04(a) & 21 U.S.C. § Bal(a)(1), defendant pharmacist pled 'not guilty' because he was sure he obtained legitimate medical purposes before every controlled substance prescription was filled. After he lost at trial, he asked the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, whether there was sufficient evidence to. convict him to the Counts in the indictment because the essential element of § 1306.04(a) ‘without a legitimate medical purpose' was not satisfied . by the government's burden of proof. The Court of Appeals ruled defendant pharmacist's argument frivolous and held "knowingly distributing prescriptions outside the course of professional practice is a sufficient condition to convict a defendant under the criminal statutes" and affirmed the District Court's decision. QUESTION . : WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED BY HOLDING A JURY COULD RATIONALLY . CONCLUDE THAT DEFENDANT PHARMACIST ABDICATED HIS DUTY UNDER §§ 1306.04(a) & 841(a)(1), DESPITE PHARMACIST'S ARGUMENT THAT THERE WERE 'LEGITIMATE MEDICAL PURPOSES' FOR THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE PRESCRIPTIONS HE FILLED BECAUSE TRIAL WITNESSES TESTIFIED THAT THEY HAD REAL INJURIES AND MEDICAL ’ NEEDS REQUIRING MEDICATION BEFORE PHARMACIST FILLED THEIR PRESCRIPTIONS.