Legal Opinion
United States v. Danilo Bautista Batimana and Jose Edgardo Noguera
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 22, 1980No. 79-1269, 79-1270PublishedCited by 100 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUG, Circuit Judge:
Appellants, Batimana and Noguera, and a third defendant, Samuel Nicanor,1 were convicted by a jury of conspiring to import and possess with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846, 952(a), 960(a)(1), and 963 (Count One), and possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (Count Two). Each was placed on probation for five years. Appellants contend that there was insufficient evidence to support their convictions.
Nicanor and a man named Virgilio Delin had arranged to have Edgardo Lavadia bring 500 grams of…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Pinkerton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Iannelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Nye & Nissen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- United States v. PeoniCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938
- United States v. RoselliCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by100 opinions
- Gilbrook v. City of WestminsterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- United States v. Juan Castillo, Aka: Luis Hong Rojas, United States of America v. Antonio De La RentaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Richard AicheleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- United States v. Harry Christian (84-5843), Joe L. Davis (85-5005/85-5346)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1986
- United States v. Victor Montano DislaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
95 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.