AND · 21usc846:intentional-joinder
Potter reconciles two- and three-part formulations. Participation distinguishes intentional joinder from mere presence; it cannot resurrect the overt-act requirement rejected by Shabani. Separate knowledge and volition are required, without an additional universal act requirement.
Exact element source
conspiresSource:
docroot/ir/usc/title21.jsonl#title21_sec846; Unicode character offsets [56:65] (end exclusive); SHA-256 2e517c5d16d23f29a12a2ee674170178c593255445eb2bf7e8f112f4236ea1e1.Routes and case patterns
| Route | Definition | Merits instance blocks | Distinct merits cases | Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified route provisional; 2 observed cases | no definition yet | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 2 | 0 | Used only in non-merits blocks (2). Excluded context examples:U.S. v. Leal — 921 F.3d 951 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019 — not reached · basis not recorded (21usc846: author: Astra4 · QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2-crosscheck.md)) · applied/procedural · not counted United States v. Shabani — 513 U.S. 10 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached · basis not recorded (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · rule-announced/merits · not counted |
| _whole accepted; 3 observed cases | The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. | 3 Satisfied 2; not satisfied 1; excluded context 0 | 3 | United States v. Guzman-Ortiz — 365 F. Supp. 3d 215 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — not · no-evidence (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Delgado — 367 F. Supp. 3d 286 (2019) · United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania · 2019 — satisfied · proved (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Potter — 927 F.3d 446 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted |
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Guzman-Ortiz — 365 F. Supp. 3d 215 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — not · no-evidence (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence Presence in the apartment and probable awareness of drug activity were accepted; what failed was proof that defendant chose to participate. The court refused to infer membership from "human experience" absent evidence of the parties' relationship. | mere-presence-at-stash-apartment/knowledge-without-participation | Similarly, the fact that a defendant "knew what was going on" is, by itself, "not enough to establish intent to conspire."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [9830:9952] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.In this case, as noted earlier, defendant's presence in the apartment is undisputed and the evidence supports a finding that he, at some point, knew illegal drug activity was conducted therein.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [15456:15649] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.Guzman-Ortiz's only drug-related activity occurred in response to the raid by law enforcement.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [13982:14076] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.There was, however, evidence of his participation in gathering and moving groceries and later dining with Soto-Peguero and Cabral.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [14077:14207] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.The evidence did show that Soto-Peguero spoke with and texted Mejia-Ramos about heroin sales on several occasions during the afternoon and evening of July 6, 2015, but, as noted earlier, there was no testimony that defendant heard or viewed these communications, or had any knowledge thereof.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [17014:17306] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.In sum, no evidence showed defendant's participation or agreement to participate in any drug-related activity except the attempted hiding of a package of heroin in response to the law enforcement raid.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [17686:17887] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c. |
| United States v. Delgado — 367 F. Supp. 3d 286 (2019) · United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania · 2019 — satisfied · proved (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved The leader's testimony that he gave Armando drugs to pass to the women, plus Armando's own admissions to a jailhouse witness, established membership; the same sentence also disposes of knowledge, which gets no separate analysis. | driver-given-drugs-to-supply-victims/own-admissions | He further attested that he gave drugs to both D'Ambrosio and Armando to "supply the girls."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_367.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/367/0286-01; Unicode character offsets [27155:27247] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6da2fad840dd9eda195445935993c1f3b3e2f24776499785931141362cb902b7.According to Simmons, Armando was "pretty adamant that he was selling marijuana."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_367.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/367/0286-01; Unicode character offsets [27889:27970] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6da2fad840dd9eda195445935993c1f3b3e2f24776499785931141362cb902b7.Moreover, in the handwritten document Armando gave to Simmons, Armando wrote "Dilverd [sic] controlled sub[stances]" in the "True" column.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_367.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/367/0286-01; Unicode character offsets [28003:28141] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6da2fad840dd9eda195445935993c1f3b3e2f24776499785931141362cb902b7.The evidence also demonstrates Armando's membership and participation in that agreement, as well as his knowledge of the conspiracy and his intent to accomplish its specific objective-the distribution and possession with intent to distribute oxycodone, cocaine, and marijuana.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_367.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/367/0286-01; Unicode character offsets [28391:28667] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6da2fad840dd9eda195445935993c1f3b3e2f24776499785931141362cb902b7.We will deny Armando's Rule 29 motion as to Count 6.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_367.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/367/0286-01; Unicode character offsets [28668:28720] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6da2fad840dd9eda195445935993c1f3b3e2f24776499785931141362cb902b7. |
| U.S. v. Leal — 921 F.3d 951 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019 — not reached (21usc846: author: Astra4 · QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2-crosscheck.md)) | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / proceduralProcedural conspiracy-identity ruling; not a fresh merits sufficiency instance. | Unspecified route | Although two or more people must agree to form a conspiracy, an informant cannot count toward that requirement: "[T]here can be no indictable conspiracy involving only the defendant and government agents or informers."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_921.jsonl#/f3d/921/0951-01; Unicode character offsets [9860:10078] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9548ccac58b96b23f4639dd698eb70e092ffa90878ae6553b9b59f22ede5657e. |
| United States v. Potter — 927 F.3d 446 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; party: defendant Potter; subject: party=defendant Potter The court affirms sufficiency of the conspiracy evidence. Repeated distribution-scale purchases plus coordination and financing support the inferred agreement/knowing joinder; a buyer-seller transaction alone is not the stated rule. | tacit/repeated-distribution-purchases | Likewise, Potter continued his distribution efforts from jail by agreeing to front Hilliard funds to buy drugs from Hogan in exchange for a cut.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_927.jsonl#/f3d/927/0446-01; Unicode character offsets [20523:20667] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e2f6057ca05dfd945ac518e7765b2298d106e72992747e73d9d97250674a44c2.The evidence also could lead a rational jury to find § 846 's other elements-that Potter knowingly and voluntarily participated in (that is, joined) the conspiracy.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_927.jsonl#/f3d/927/0446-01; Unicode character offsets [20668:20832] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e2f6057ca05dfd945ac518e7765b2298d106e72992747e73d9d97250674a44c2. |
| United States v. Shabani — 513 U.S. 10 (1994) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1994 — not reached (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | not_reached Excluded from merits counts rule-announced / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
Court interpretations
interpretation
So whether phrased as two elements or three, a conviction under § 846 requires an agreement to violate the drug laws, the defendant's knowledge of the agreement, and the defendant's decision to voluntarily join (or "participate in") it.
United States v. Potter — 927 F.3d 446 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 (21usc846: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed)
So whether phrased as two elements or three, a conviction under § 846 requires an agreement to violate the drug laws, the defendant's knowledge of the agreement, and the defendant's decision to voluntarily join (or "participate in") it.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_927.jsonl#/f3d/927/0446-01; Unicode character offsets [19358:19594] (end exclusive); SHA-256 e2f6057ca05dfd945ac518e7765b2298d106e72992747e73d9d97250674a44c2.Potter reconciles two- and three-part formulations. Participation distinguishes intentional joinder from mere presence; it cannot resurrect the overt-act requirement rejected by Shabani. Separate knowledge and volition are required, without an additional universal act requirement.