United States v. Gerald Eiland

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing ability of courts of appeals to direct entry of judgment for a lesser-included offense when conviction of a greater offense cannot be sustained
• explaining that the placement of informants does not demonstrate lack of necessity because those informants were not close enough to the core members of the conspiracy to “have access to the most closely held secrets”
• requiring “an agreement between at least two people to violate [the Controlled Substances Act]”
• paraphrasing the February 13, 2004, Sparks Affidavit
• finding two years satisfies the longevity requirement
• paraphrasing the February 13, 2004, Sparks Affidavit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).