United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019-07-31
21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed
Case and law context
Role: background; posture: Jury conviction appeal; evidentiary-instruction and sentencing issues; result: mixed; claim:
Uncertainty
None recorded
Misfit
Evidence adequate to make an error nonprejudicial need not be equated with a separately reviewed element. The source distinguishes admitted substantive possession/distribution from contested conspiracy.
Claimant outcome refers to the prosecuting government, not the defendant-appellant; remanded and mixed retain unresolved or split dispositions.
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 8
| Case | Identified offense in Subchapter I | Agreement of two or more persons to the unlawful object | Knowledge of the unlawful agreement and objective | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | Withdrawal before the applicable limitations period | Intent to commit the identified object offense |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Buchanan — 933 F.3d 501 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | ○ not reached · basis not recordedNot counted: background/procedural | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–8 of 8
| Case | Conduct beyond preparation strongly corroborating intent | Object-offense penalty incorporation |
|---|---|---|
| United States v. Buchanan — 933 F.3d 501 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Buchanan — 933 F.3d 501 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — not reached (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | Agreement of two or more persons to the unlawful object | not_reached Excluded from merits counts background / proceduralThe court assesses cumulative evidence and prejudice from omitted expert instructions under plain-error review. This is not coded as a fresh merits sufficiency finding. | evidentiary-error/corroborating-shipment-coordination | For example, Hobbs testified that during the time he was in the car with Buchanan driving around and searching for the missing package, Buchanan repeatedly spoke with someone on the phone about the package.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_933.jsonl#/f3d/933/0501-01; Unicode character offsets [23223:23429] (end exclusive); SHA-256 d8ef780cfb5ac59cb14536a09f5f676824cdb333dad7e487bcb5e059ae417e56.Hobbs also testified that he sent Buchanan lists of addresses to which Buchanan then had packages delivered.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_933.jsonl#/f3d/933/0501-01; Unicode character offsets [23545:23653] (end exclusive); SHA-256 d8ef780cfb5ac59cb14536a09f5f676824cdb333dad7e487bcb5e059ae417e56.Furthermore, even to the extent that Adams's and Cajuste's testimony supported the conspiracy conviction as opposed to only the conviction for possession with intent to distribute, the government presented sufficient additional evidence supporting the conspiracy conviction that the opinion testimony was cumulative and unlikely to have influenced the verdict.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_933.jsonl#/f3d/933/0501-01; Unicode character offsets [20325:20685] (end exclusive); SHA-256 d8ef780cfb5ac59cb14536a09f5f676824cdb333dad7e487bcb5e059ae417e56. |
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
The elements of a drug distribution conspiracy are "(1) an agreement to violate drug laws ... ; (2) knowledge and intent to join the conspiracy; and (3) participation in the conspiracy."
United States v. Buchanan — 933 F.3d 501 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed)
The elements of a drug distribution conspiracy are "(1) an agreement to violate drug laws ... ; (2) knowledge and intent to join the conspiracy; and (3) participation in the conspiracy."Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_933.jsonl#/f3d/933/0501-01; Unicode character offsets [20686:20872] (end exclusive); SHA-256 d8ef780cfb5ac59cb14536a09f5f676824cdb333dad7e487bcb5e059ae417e56.Knowing that others commit drug crimes does not itself establish that this defendant chose to join. Culpability as to the substance follows the chosen object offense; general association with offenders is insufficient.