Legal Opinion
United States v. Earl Samuel Stuart and Jerome Olen Hayden
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided January 16, 1991No. 90-5201MN, 90-5215MNPublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BATTEY, District Judge.
Appellants Earl Samuel Stuart and Jerome Olen Hayden were convicted by jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. 1 They were tried jointly for the offense of aiding and abetting each other in knowingly and intentionally attempting to possess with the intent to distribute more than 500 grams of cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance, a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B).
Stuart raises the following claims of error on appeal: (1) the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to establish Stuart’s intent to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Holland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Hampton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. Robert Kenneth Rich, United States of America v. Larry J. WeberCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- United States v. Gerald ConnellCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Mark William Paul StauferCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- United States v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- United States of America, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Michael Floyd Barth, Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Lorenzo NaranjoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.