Skip navigation

U.S. v. Stewart, No. 95-3163 (D.C. Cir.) (104 F.3d 1377) (February 10, 1997) (Judge Judith W. Rogers)

Here the court affirmed a drug conviction even though the Government and its chief witness agreed it was unlikely that the defendant participated in some prior drug transactions, because "nothing required the jury to accept" that testimony.

Here's one of those fantastical conspiracy cases that calls to mind the words ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login