PROHIBITED ACTS RELATED TO VISITS TO MORE THAN

PROHIBITED ACTS RELATED TO VISITS TO MORE THAN ONE PRACTITIONER TO OBTAIN CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE PRESCRIPTIONS SPECIAL INTERROGATORY: H.R.S. § 329-46 Answer the questions listed below in the order that they are asked. Your answer to a question must be unanimous. If your answer is "Yes," please stop and do not answer any of the remaining questions; if your answer is "No," please answer the next question. 1. Did the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the (specify controlled substance(s)) prescriptions that Defendant intentionally or knowingly obtained were for 100 or more [capsules] [tablets] [dosage units] in excess of what any single practitioner would have [prescribed] [dispensed] for the time period and legitimate medical purpose represented? Yes _____ No _____ 2. Did the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the (specify controlled substance(s)) prescriptions that Defendant intentionally or knowingly obtained were for 50 or more [capsules] [tablets] [dosage units] in excess of what any single practitioner would have [prescribed] [dispensed] for the time period and legitimate medical purpose represented? Yes _____ No _____ 3. Did the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the (specify controlled substance(s)) prescriptions that Defendant intentionally or knowingly obtained were for 25 or more [capsules] [tablets] [dosage units] in excess of what any single practitioner would have [prescribed] [dispensed] for the time period and legitimate medical purpose represented? Yes _____ No _____ Notes H.R.S. §§ 329-46, 712-1244 to 712-246. This instruction should be given as appropriate. The jury’s answer to an interrogatory of this type, whether affirmative or negative, must be unanimous. See State v. Peralto, 95 Hawai`i 1, 18 P.3d 203 (2001); see also State v. Yamada, 99 Hawai`i 542, 57 P.3d 467 (2002).