In Denny, the Second Circuit held that "[w]hile there is undoubtedly a common sense aspect to [the common practices relating to the use of couriers], a jury simply cannot be expected to know... the methods employed by dealers in paying couriers and reimbursing their expenses."
Summary of this case from United States v. MillerNo. 97-1485.
May 20, 1998.
Appeal from the E.D.N.Y.
Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.
In Denny, the Second Circuit held that "[w]hile there is undoubtedly a common sense aspect to [the common practices relating to the use of couriers], a jury simply cannot be expected to know... the methods employed by dealers in paying couriers and reimbursing their expenses."
Summary of this case from United States v. MillerFull title:U.S. v. DENNY
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Date published: May 20, 1998
" Gov't Suppl. Letter 1. "'[O]perations of narcotics dealers are a proper subject for expert testimony' when…
United States v. MillerThus, while the government can have an expert testify about the use of couriers and common practices, the…