United States v. James Robert Carlson

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that knowledge of an analogue’s effects may be probative of the defendant’s knowledge of chemical structure
• affirming the district court’s discretion to admit expert testimony on substantial similarity “based on” evidence, specialized knowledge, literature review, and discussions with other scientists
• rejecting the defendant’s legal challenge to the application of a 1:167 marijuana-equivalency ratio for synthetic cannabi-noids, such as XLR-11, UR-144, and AM-2201
• applying strict liability standard to defendant convicted of misdemeanor violation of § 331 where defendant personally participated in violations
• rejecting the argument that “the Analogue Act is unconstitutional because it does not provide notice of which acts are criminal and permits arbitrary enforcement contrary to the Due Process Clause”
• finding the \great weight of the case law\ supports a \plain English\ ruling

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).