Opinion ID: 706005
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: introduction

Text: 3 Defendant Katherine Ann Mitchell was charged in a three-count indictment with one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana (Count I) and two counts (Counts 2 and 3) of possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. Following a trial in the Western District of Tennessee, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the marijuana charge (Count 1), as well as on one of the crack cocaine counts (Count 2), but guilty on Count 3. 4 During its deliberations, the jury sent a note to the District Court Judge, which asked Can entrapment be applied to one count and not to others: Re: paragraph one, page 23. [Tr. p. 456]. The District Court answered this in the affirmative, and counsel for the government agreed. The defense counsel objected because he felt the question was ambiguous and therefore wanted time to research the question. The district court rejected defense counsel's arguments, and sent a signed note back to the jury stating simply: Members of the jury: Yes. [Tr. 459]. 5 Mitchell now appeals, claiming the District Court erred in giving this response to the jury's question.