State v. Samuel Maduro
Vermont Supreme Court
174 Vt. 302, 816 A.2d 432 (2002)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
The State of Vermont (plaintiff) prosecuted Samuel Maduro (defendant) for conspiring with K.M., a female minor, to sell cocaine, and for delivering cocaine to K.M. The relevant events took place in Maduro's apartment early in 1999. The trial judge admitted the testimony of another man, Keith Merrow, that several times in early 1999, he went to Maduro's apartment to pick up cocaine for sale to Merrow's customers, who were unknown to Maduro and who never accompanied Merrow to the apartment. Merrow testified that he once saw a girl in the apartment, but that she neither participated in nor observed any drug-related transaction between Maduro and Merrow. The judge instructed the jury that they could consider Merrow's testimony as bearing on both counts against Maduro. After the jury convicted Maduro, he appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court, contending that Merrow's testimony related to a separate, uncharged conspiracy and therefore was inadmissible evidence that Maduro either conspired with or delivered cocaine to K.M.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Morse, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
