Source: https://www.alexandriafederalattorney.com/federal-drug-conviction-overturned-due-to-the-govts-impermissible-speculation/
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 06:20:06+00:00

Document:
William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge.
which Chief Judge Traxler and Judge Keenan joined.
intent to distribute (Count VI), in violation of 21 U.S.C.
other respects, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
son spoke by phone only minutes before.
firmed that he had. J.A. 409.
who tested the narcotics seized from Hickman and Caldwell.
enough to hold one kilogram of user-strength heroin.
for a new trial pursuant to Rule 33, which was denied.
which the Government had noticed pursuant to 21 U.S.C.
session with intent to distribute.
greater amount of heroin than was otherwise proved at trial.
a reasonable doubt the charged one-kilogram conspiracy.
doubt,” United States v. Young, 609 F.3d 348, 355 (4th Cir.
ing of quantity cannot stand.
alleged in Count I of the superseding indictment.
dence.” United States v. Godwin, 272 F.3d 659 (4th Cir.
retrieve the narcotics] from him yo”).
to go down there and see . . . Fat Cat”).
Jones’s last five grams of heroin, which Hickman’s funds wouldn’t cover).
and finding the bag of heroin).
prior” from someone exiting Jones’s store, J.A. 335.
most users, which Agent O’Meara estimated to be 8%. J.A.
many parts of solvent are mixed with each part of heroin, J.A.
is always in the ratio of 1:n, where n is a natural number.
ernment would have established a total of 681 grams.
stop of Hickman, their contents were never weighed. J.A.
ted to the crime lab for testing at “around 9 to about 11” percent, J.A. 173.
seized heroin would have been “cut down further . . . [d]own to 10%.” J.A.
lower purity target would be wholly unreasonable on this record.
hypothetical sum of 836 grams.
of Fat Cat’s and recover heroin from?
A. We recovered heroin out of – the week prior.
I think it was April 17th.
this final amount, the sum would fall short of one kilogram.
was forced to move on. J.A. 94-95.
counter. J.A. 276-77, 284-85, 292.
dise he hoped to sell.
a conspiracy. See United States v. Henderson, 58 F.3d 1145 (7th Cir.
conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which instruct that, “[w]here . . .
inferences. Its teachings are instructive here.
from [defendant] on the other occasions.”).
United States v. Rodriguez, 525 F.3d 85, 107-08 (1st Cir.
F.2d 1289, 1302 (6th Cir. 1990)).
States v. Miele, 989 F.2d 659, 668 (3d Cir. 1993).
insufficient evidence. See Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S.
243 F.3d 635, 674-76 (2d Cir. 2001); United States v.
heroin attributable to him, is without merit.
defense.” United States v. Lighty, 616 F.3d 321, 366 (4th Cir.
scope of his agreement.” J.A. 348.
would be involved in the conspiracy which he joined.” J.A.
of drugs beyond a reasonable doubt.” J.A. 359a.
e.g., United States v. Brooks, 524 F.3d 549, 558 (4th Cir.
intercepted calls, and discussed several options. J.A. 363-65.
specify, as long as we get the books back after that.” J.A. 365.
send one book back, yeah.” J.A. 365.
distribution was properly charged under the common law.
accordingly. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
This entry was posted in Federal Criminal Defense Attorney. Bookmark the permalink.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.