holding that sentence should be based on amount of precursor chemicals possessed by the defendant, rather than on the amount of cocaine that could have been manufactured with the precursors
How later courts described this case
- holding that sentence should be based on amount of precursor chemicals possessed by the defendant, rather than on the amount of cocaine that could have been manufactured with the precursors
- noting, in the course of upholding the denial of a suppression motion, that “the agents in fact did not read” the warrants
- allowing application of U.S.S.G. Sec. 2D1.1 for 21 U.S.C.A. violations only when the defendant knew or could reasonably foresee the manufacturing quantity on which sentencing is based
- allowing application of U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 for 21 U.S.C.A. violations only when the defendant knew or could reasonably foresee the manufacturing quantity on which sentencing is based
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LUMBARD, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in the affirmance of Perrone’s convictions and in the remand to the district court for resentencing.
I dissent from the reversal of Gomez’s convictions. Based on the proof before the jury, as is fully set forth in the majority opinion, I believe there was sufficient evidence to support Gomez’s convictions. We must remember that the jury heard the witnesses’ testimony and listened to defense counsel’s attempt to explain the part Gomez played in the offense. Obviously, the jury was not persuaded; it did not believe that Gomez had no guilty knowledge of what was being done. This verdict is supported by the evidence.