Legal Opinion

United States v. Claudia O'campo, United States v. Julian Redeondo

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided September 3, 1992No. 91-1089, 91-1278PublishedCited by 98 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOODLOCK, District Judge.

These appeals require that we address issues of vicarious responsibility as they relate to both substantive criminal law and the law of criminal sentencing.

Appellant Julian Redeondo first appeared visible to investigators in this undercover drug prosecution after the exchange of drugs and money had been completed during the last of the three drug transactions involved. He had been in prison when the first two transactions were undertaken. There was no direct evidence of his involvement until 90 minutes after the exchange, when he made telephone contact with the paging…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Pinkerton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Nye & Nissen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Blumenthal v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. United States v. BoylanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by98 opinions

  1. United States v. SepulvedaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
  2. United States v. BrandonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
  3. United States v. InnamoratiCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
  4. United States v. Soto-BeniquezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2003
  5. United States v. Octavio Carreon, and Armando MelendezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994

93 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API