Missouri Lawyers Media Missouri legal news and public notices
(1)Where defendants, who were convicted of conspiracy to distribute drugs, argued that there was a variance between the crime charged in the indictment and the evidence presented at trial, the evidence was sufficient to convict the two of participating in a single conspiracy, even though there was no evidence that they knew each other or were aware of the other’s role in the conspiracy.
(2)Where officers knew of a defendant’s prior drug dealing and of suspicious activity associated with his motel room, the officers had reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant’s vehicle and question its occupants, and the convictions are affirmed over the defendants’ remaining challenges to the instructions and sentencing.
Judgment is affirmed.
U.S. v. Chantharath; U.S. v. Guzman-Ortiz (MLW No. 64614/Case No. 12-1273/12-1620 – 14 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Riley, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Schreier, J. (Thomas Wade Clayton, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, and James Arthur Eirinberg, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, argued for appellants) (John E. Haak, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, argued for appellee).
Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)
