The following excerpt is from United States v. McElmurry, 776 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 2015):
16 See United States v. Mincoff, 574 F.3d 1186, 1198 (9th Cir.2009) (We adopt the rule articulated by our sister circuits that a narcotics distribution charge may be established without proof of possession.).
16 See United States v. Mincoff, 574 F.3d 1186, 1198 (9th Cir.2009) (We adopt the rule articulated by our sister circuits that a narcotics distribution charge may be established without proof of possession.).
17 See United States v. Terry, 911 F.2d 272, 278 (9th Cir.1990) (To prove constructive possession, the government must prove a sufficient connection between the defendant and the contraband to support the inference that the defendant exercised dominion and control over the substance.) (internal quotation marks omitted).
17 See United States v. Terry, 911 F.2d 272, 278 (9th Cir.1990) (To prove constructive possession, the government must prove a sufficient connection between the defendant and the contraband to support the inference that the defendant exercised dominion and control over the substance.) (internal quotation marks omitted).
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.