United States v. Morris Pearce, (89-3990), Alan Thorpe, (89-4003)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a judge has broad discretion to admit expert testimony to assist the trier of fact in areas that are “beyond the understanding of the average layman”
• finding, as here, that “[t]he trial court’s decision to permit the expert testimony occurred after all other evidence had been introduced”
• finding mere presence at time of drug bust was insufficient evidence of agreement
• upholding expert testimony by a law-enforcement officer concerning drug dealing and concluding that \[t]he law enforcement officers may testify concerning the methods and techniques employed in an area of criminal activity and to establish [the] 'modus operandi' of particular crimes\
• “[T]he government must prove . . . that each conspirator knew of, intended to join and participated in the conspiracy.” (emphasis added)
• defendants' presence at house during raid without more held insufficient

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).