U.S. v. Wiley

794 F.2d 514 (1986)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

U.S. v. Wiley

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
794 F.2d 514 (1986)

Facts

A warden at a federal prison asked an inmate-informant to investigate drug use and smuggling within the prison. Through discussions with other inmates, the informant learned that an inmate named Wiley (defendant) could facilitate having marijuana smuggled into the prison. The informant met with Wiley a number of times and eventually convinced Wiley to assist in smuggling one pound of marijuana into the prison in exchange for an ounce of the drug Wiley would keep himself. Wiley said that the drugs could be smuggled into the prison via a prison cook, Garbiso, who had acted as a courier for Wiley before. Wiley told the informant that Garbiso would be more likely to participate if the drugs were delivered to Garbiso by someone he could trust on the outside. Wiley suggested that they could have asked Wiley’s sometime girlfriend Lee, whom Garbiso was aware of but had never met, but that this was not possible because Wiley and Lee were not currently on good terms. The informant suggested that he could find someone to pose as Lee. After negotiations between the informant, Wiley, and Garbiso, the smuggling plan went ahead. The marijuana was provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and delivered to Garbiso by an FBI agent pretending to be Lee. Garbiso smuggled the drugs into the prison, but the drugs were never found by the authorities after that, thwarting the undercover mission. Wiley was convicted of conspiracy to possess and distribute marijuana. Wiley appealed, alleging that the government’s conduct in the undercover operation was so outrageous that it violated due process.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)

Dissent (Ferguson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 745,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership