United States v. Spotted Elk

How courts have described this case

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

• considering the fact that a defendant convicted of multiple drug crimes was in possession of multiple EBT cards
• involving the operation of a “drug trafficking business” where testimony about the use of plastic wrap and grease used to mask odors on drugs and drug money from K-9 units was held to be permissible modus operandi evidence
• “a defendant’s conviction for conspiracy does not automatically mean that every conspirator has foreseen the total quantity of drugs involved in the entire conspiracy”
• Dauberb hearing not required where district court is satisfied that fingerprint expert has the requisite training, education, and experience
• “It is now clear that the Confrontation Clause does not apply to non-testimonial statements by an out-of-court declarant.”
• \[T]he emphasis under § 1B1.3 is the scope of the individual defendant's undertaking ... rather than the scope of the conspiracy as a whole[.]\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).