United States v. Cabrales case brief summary
524 U.S. 1 (1998)
CASE FACTS
Respondent defendant was charged with conspiracy and money laundering in a three-count indictment returned in a Missouri U.S. District Court. The currency purportedly laundered derived from the unlawful distribution of cocaine in Missouri. However, the laundering alleged in the indictment occurred entirely in Florida. Respondent made a motion to dismiss the indictment for improper venue.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The District Court affirmed as to the money laundering counts but denied the motion as to the conspiracy count. The lower appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the money-laundering counts, but reversed as to the conspiracy count.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed holding that U.S. Constitutional Amendment VI, called for trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime was committed. Respondent was not linked to any drug activity in Missouri, only to allegedly laundered money in Florida.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the dismissal of the indictment holding that respondent defendant was not linked to any drug activity in Missouri, only to alleged laundered money in Florida. U.S. Constitutional Amendment VI called for trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime was committed.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
524 U.S. 1 (1998)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioner government sought writ of
certiorari review of a decision of the U.S. District Court of Appeals
for the Eighth Circuit that granted respondent defendant's motion to
dismiss an indictment on conspiracy and money laundering charges
based on improper venue.CASE FACTS
Respondent defendant was charged with conspiracy and money laundering in a three-count indictment returned in a Missouri U.S. District Court. The currency purportedly laundered derived from the unlawful distribution of cocaine in Missouri. However, the laundering alleged in the indictment occurred entirely in Florida. Respondent made a motion to dismiss the indictment for improper venue.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The District Court affirmed as to the money laundering counts but denied the motion as to the conspiracy count. The lower appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the money-laundering counts, but reversed as to the conspiracy count.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed holding that U.S. Constitutional Amendment VI, called for trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime was committed. Respondent was not linked to any drug activity in Missouri, only to allegedly laundered money in Florida.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the dismissal of the indictment holding that respondent defendant was not linked to any drug activity in Missouri, only to alleged laundered money in Florida. U.S. Constitutional Amendment VI called for trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime was committed.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment