Source: cases/21usc841/f3d-225-1053-us-v-nordby.case
Case source: https://www.neochart.com/catalog/cases/f3d/volume_225/1053_01/index.html
We hold that the amount of drugs for which a defendant is sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1) is such a fact, and that our existing precedent to the contrary is overruled to the extent that it is inconsistent with Apprendi.
Thus, under Apprendi the “prescribed statutory maximum” for a single conviction under § 841 for an undetermined amount of marijuana is five years.
We conclude that the district court erred by sentencing Nordby under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846 for manufacturing, possessing with intent to distribute and conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 1000 or more marijuana plants without submitting the question of marijuana quantity to the jury and without a finding that the marijuana quantity had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
casedsl 1.2 # author: Flash2 (gemini-3.8-flash-high) # triaged-by: Fable (2026-11-10) case /f3d/225/1053-01 name United States v. Nordby cite 225 F.3d 1053 (2000) court United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit date 2000-09-11 url catalog/cases/f3d/volume_225/1053_01/index.html source ir/caselaw/f3d_225.jsonl sha1=c6f90515b559b4d403b5bada70ca9fdf23621c36 chars=28764 opinion maj : majority by Canby @52..25602 controlling opinion rein : concurrence by Reinhardt @25603..28764 law 21usc841 (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A)(vii) role applied posture criminal; direct appeal from resentencing after jury conviction for marijuana manufacture, possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy; defendant challenges (plain-error review) the ten-year sentence imposed under § 841(b)(1)(A)(vii) on a judge's preponderance finding of drug quantity; sentence vacated and remanded for resentencing within the five-year maximum supported by the verdict result claimant-lost ? other: result is recorded for the only § 841 question on appeal (the § 841(b)(1)(A) quantity tier, lost by the government); the § 841(a)(1) convictions themselves were not under review and stand element quantity : not-satisfied [law] route jury-finding-of-threshold pattern judge-found-1000-plants-by-preponderance-jury-told-quantity-irrelevant fact @2618..2882 [cuts-against absent] | Instead, the jury was instructed that “the government is not required to prove the amount or quantity of marijuana manufactured as long as the government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that defendants manufactured a measurable or detectable amount of marijuana.” fact @10108..10301 [cuts-against absent] | First, Nordby’s jury made no finding regarding the specific amount of marijuana that Nordby manufactured, possessed with intent to distribute, or conspired to possess with intent to distribute. fact @4073..4186 [supports] | The court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Nordby was responsible for 1000 or more marijuana plants. fact @17012..17275 [cuts-against] | Although it was uncontested at trial that over 2000 marijuana plants were found growing on land owned by Nordby, Nordby consistently maintained that he was not responsible for growing these plants, or for conspiring to do so at the time charged in the indictment. rule @433..658 | We hold that the amount of drugs for which a defendant is sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1) is such a fact, and that our existing precedent to the contrary is overruled to the extent that it is inconsistent with Apprendi. rule @11924..12070 | Thus, under Apprendi the “prescribed statutory maximum” for a single conviction under § 841 for an undetermined amount of marijuana is five years. held @12286..12676 | We conclude that the district court erred by sentencing Nordby under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846 for manufacturing, possessing with intent to distribute and conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 1000 or more marijuana plants without submitting the question of marijuana quantity to the jury and without a finding that the marijuana quantity had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. gloss Sentence under § 841(b)(1)(A)(vii) vacated on plain-error review: under Apprendi, drug quantity that raises the statutory maximum from five years to life must be submitted to the jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt, not found by the sentencing judge by a preponderance. The error was prejudicial because the defendant contested responsibility for the 1993 plants. element act.manufacture : satisfied [proved] decider jury review none route _whole pattern outdoor-marijuana-gardens-on-defendants-parcels fact @1656..1856 [supports] | On two of the parcels owned by Kayle Nordby, police found thirty-one outdoor marijuana gardens containing 2,308 marijuana plants as well as an indoor growing shed that had been used to grow marijuana. fact @17317..17481 [cuts-against] | In fact, he had been vacationing for much of the time that the marijuana crop had been in the ground, and only returned to the area five days before being arrested. gloss The jury's manufacture verdict (a "measurable or detectable amount") is reported, not reviewed: this appeal is from resentencing only. The defendant never conceded responsibility for the charged August-September 1993 grow. element knowledge : not-reached gloss Not contested on appeal.