Walton v. California Adult Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that scientific analysis or expert testimony is not required to prove the illicit nature of a substance and proof identifying the substance may be based on the opinion of a knowledgeable lay person
• holding that scientific analysis or expert testimony is not required to prove the illicit nature of a substance and proof identifying the substance may be based on the opinion of a knowledgeable lay person
• explaining that “[p]roof based on scientific analysis or expert testimony is not required to prove the illicit nature of a substance”
• assistance not ineffective if counsel’s failure to object could have been result of reasonable decision not to emphasize evidence adverse to client
• “It is not necessary that the government prove that the defendant ... knew the extent of the conspiracy.”
• court considered testimony of cocaine user as well as price, packaging, and exchange of money in determining whether government established substance was cocaine

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).