FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information
VOLUME
8 - CHAPTER 120
Go to
Volume
8 Table of Contents - Go to
Chapter
120 Table of Contents
120.2 Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE)
120.2.3 Continuing Criminal Enterprise: Defenses And Defense Theories
120.2.3.1 Continuing Criminal Enterprise: Defense Theory That "Buyer-Seller" Relationship Is Insufficient
FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information
VOLUME 8 - CHAPTER 120
120.2.3.1 Continuing Criminal Enterprise: Defense Theory That "Buyer-Seller" Relationship Is Insufficient
RATIONALE: When the conspiracy allegation is based on the purchase or sale of contraband it a mere buyer-seller relationship between the parties is insufficient to make them conspirators. Without a specific instruction on this defense theory the jury may improperly assume that the mere purchase or sale of illegal drugs is sufficient to prove conspiracy.
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES: Just as a buyer-seller relationship is insufficient to convict of conspiracy (see FORECITE National™ 83.3.2.1 [Conspiracy: Defense Theory That "Buyer-Seller Relationship" Is Insufficient]) so to is it insufficient to convict of a continuing criminal enterprise under 21 USC 848. (See U.S. v. Butler (4th Cir. 1989) 885 F2d 195, 201.)
FEDERALIZATION: To federalize this request, click here. [Constitutional Macro 2.3; 3.8; 4.1].
RESEARCH NOTES:
See generally FORECITE National™ 305.3.13 [Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE)].
RELATED FEDERAL MODEL INSTRUCTIONS:
See 5th Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions - Criminal 2.90.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:
To be properly counted toward the five individuals required for a CCE conviction, there must be something more than a mere buyer-seller relationship between the defendant and the other individuals. Unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant took further steps to organize, supervise, or manage these five individuals, you must return a verdict of not guilty.
[See generally U.S. v. Butler (4th Cir. 1989) 885 F2d 195, 201; cf. HORN’S FEDERAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS, FOURTH CIRCUIT EDITION 2.08, [Continuing Criminal Enterprise] ¶ 7 (TRCC 1999).]