Almusa, O. v. State Bd. Medicine
This text of Almusa, O. v. State Bd. Medicine (Almusa, O. v. State Bd. Medicine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
OMAR ALMUSA, M.D., : No. 409 MAL 2023 : Petitioner : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the v. : Commonwealth Court : : STATE BOARD OF MEDICINE, : : Respondent :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 3rd day of April, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is
GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:
(1) Did the Commonwealth Court err when it concluded that Sections 40(b) and 43(b) of the Medical Practice Act [of 1985], 63 P.S. §§ 422.40(b) and 422.43(b), impose a minimum [10]-year automatic suspension for a felony drug conviction and do not require distinct and separate [State Board of Medicine] actions?
(2) Did the Commonwealth Court err when it concluded that granting Dr. Almusa a reinstatement hearing would constitute a retroactive application of [Section 3113(f) of the Act of July 1, 2020, P.L. 575 (Act 53), 63 Pa. C.S. § 3113(f)]?
(3) Does the rule of lenity support granting Dr. Almusa a reinstatement hearing?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Almusa, O. v. State Bd. Medicine, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/almusa-o-v-state-bd-medicine-pa-2024.