United States v. Robert Craig Wexler

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that although defendant who served as a lookout during sale of narcotics was in communication with the seller “at various times throughout the operation” there was “missing ... any evidence that [the defendant] knew that [the sale involved] a controlled substance”
• reasoning that the evidence was “just as consistent ... with a conspiracy to transport stolen goods, an entirely different crime”
• noting that “[t]he evidence is just as consistent ... with a conspiracy to transport stolen goods, an entirely different crime”
• noting that “[t]he evidence is just as consistent . . . with a conspiracy to transport stolen goods, an entirely different crime”
• evidence insufficient to support drug conspiracy conviction absent proof that defendant who acted as a lookout knew he was facilitating hashish distribution
• “The elements of a conspiracy may be proven entirely by circumstantial evidence. . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).