State of New Jersey v. J.H.P.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was insufficient evidence that the object of the transaction was drugs and that “no reasonable jury could have concluded that the government had met its burden of proof, which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt”
• concluding “that the evidence that Idowu knew that heroin or some other controlled substance was involved is lacking here.”
• instructing the District Court to acquit a defendant who merely carried a bag of money and a suitcase containing drugs for a dealer
• finding no evidence defendant knew the type of contraband involved, when defendant possessed a bag with drugs hidden in the liner only long enough to ascertain that it was empty
• explaining, in the context of a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence for a conspiracy conviction, that “the government is obliged to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge of the particular illegal objective contemplated by the conspiracy”
• internal citation and quotations engaged in a drug trafficking crime, we omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).