United States v. Shabani
http://dbpedia.org/resource/United_States_v._Shabani an entity of type: Thing
United States v. Shabani, 513 U.S. 10 (1994), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States clarified standards for conspiracy liability under a federal drug conspiracy statute. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court held that government prosecutors need not prove evidence of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy when prosecuting individuals under the drug conspiracy statute codified at 21 U.S.C. § 846. Justice O'Connor wrote that Congress intended to "adopt the common law definition" of conspiracy for section 846, which did not require an overt act as a precondition of liability. Justice O'Connor's opinion also compared the drug conspiracy statute to the general conspiracy statute, which requires that a conspirator commit an overt act
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
United States v. Shabani
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
United States, Petitioner v. Reshat Shabani
xsd:integer
215382
xsd:integer
1078922365
xsd:integer
9
rdf:langString
unanimous
xsd:integer
21
<second>
172800.0
<second>
172800.0
xsd:integer
10
xsd:integer
513
xsd:gMonthDay
--10-03
xsd:integer
1994
rdf:langString
United States v. Shabani,
xsd:gMonthDay
--11-01
xsd:integer
1994
rdf:langString
United States, Petitioner v. Reshat Shabani
rdf:langString
Absent contrary indications, Congress intends to adopt the common law definition of statutory terms. The common law understanding of conspiracy "does not make the doing of any act other than the act of conspiring a condition of liability."
rdf:langString
United States v. Shabani
rdf:langString
O'Connor
rdf:langString
United States v. Shabani, 513 U.S. 10 (1994), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States clarified standards for conspiracy liability under a federal drug conspiracy statute. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court held that government prosecutors need not prove evidence of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy when prosecuting individuals under the drug conspiracy statute codified at 21 U.S.C. § 846. Justice O'Connor wrote that Congress intended to "adopt the common law definition" of conspiracy for section 846, which did not require an overt act as a precondition of liability. Justice O'Connor's opinion also compared the drug conspiracy statute to the general conspiracy statute, which requires that a conspirator commit an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, noting that "[i]n light of this additional element in the general conspiracy statute, Congress' silence in § 846 speaks volumes."
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
2944