United States v. Keith Waters

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that government met its burden of proving that drug was crack cocaine by presenting testimony of: (1) DEA chemist that crack could also be cut with niacinamide; and (2
• noting that “there is no precise chemical definition of crack cocaine,” and concluding that “crack generally refers more to the way the drug is prepared and used than the specific chemical composition”
• noting that “there is no precise chemical definition of crack cocaine,” and concluding that “crack generally refers more to the way the drug is prepared and used than the specific chemical composition”
• noting an officer’s testimony that “niacinamide is commonly used in the Philadelphia area as a substitute for sodium bicarbonate,” and concluding that the district court did not err in finding that the substance at issue was crack cocaine
• “[I]t is not necessary for the government to show that a substance contains sodium bicarbonate in order to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the drugs in question are crack cocaine.”
• “[I]t is not necessary for the government to show that a substance contains sodium bicarbonate in order to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the drugs in question are crack.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).