The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Nieto, 848 F.2d 1243 (9th Cir. 1988):
Nieto contends that the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that proof of an overt act is necessary to convict him of conspiracy to distribute heroin in violation 21 U.S.C. Sec. 846. We review de novo the issue whether the district court's instructions to the jury misstated the elements of a statutory crime. United States v. Mann, 811 F.2d 495, 496-97 (9th Cir.1987).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.