Supreme Court· 10/1/1984

Orozco v. United States

Citations

469 U.S. 845
105 S. Ct. 154
53 U.S.L.W. 3238
83 L. Ed. 2d 92
1984 U.S. LEXIS 3433

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

indicating that in a case where there were two objects of a conspiracy with different penalties contained in one count, a special verdict is appropriate to determine which object the jury found to be supported by the evidence
indicating that in a case where there were two objects of a conspiracy with different penalties contained in one count, a special verdict is appropriate to determine which object the jury found to be supported by the evidence
finding that 70% non-response rate did not violate Jury Act
“ ‘the knowing supply of a raw material necessary for the commission of a crime by another constitutes aiding and abetting that crime.’ ”
money laundering after actual delivery of drugs is sufficient in proving a conspiracy to aid and abet drug distribution
defendant challenges clerk’s application of the federal jury selection act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

79 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Orozco v. United States

8 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.