United States v. Gadison

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the defendant’s transportation of cocaine on two occasions supported a fair inference that the defendant agreed to the broader drug distribution conspiracy
• following United States v. Hardeman, 933 F.2d 278, 281 (5th Cir. 1991)
• “[The defendant] put his intent at issue when he entered his plea of not guilty to the conspiracy charge in the indictment.”
• \A prior conviction for possession of cocaine is probative of a defendant's intent when the charge is conspiracy to distribute.\
• “[A] failure to corroborate 9 can suffice, without more, to support a finding that an alien 10 has not met h[er] burden of proof.”
• defendant must demonstrate with specificity why services under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(e)(1) are required

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).