State v. Lee
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Dissent
Johnson, J.,
¶ 20. dissenting. I cannot agree with the majority’s holding that a defendant’s gun ownership is per se relevant to show that a defendant is a “drug dealer.” Although there may be specific instances in which gun evidence would be relevant to the State’s case against a defendant accused of selling drugs, this is not such a case. The State charged defendant with two counts of selling cocaine. A week after the second and final transaction upon which the charges were based, defendant acquired two firearms. Defendant neither used the guns as part of the drug transactions, nor even…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. PriceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Ricardo M. InfanteCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2005
- State v. KirchoffSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
- United States v. Jesus MartinezCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- State v. RoySupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.