United States v. Honneus

508 F.2d 566 (1974)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Honneus

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
508 F.2d 566 (1974)

Facts

Geoffrey Honneus (defendant) was on trial for unlawful importation of marijuana from Jamaica. Because none of the imported marijuana was recovered, Honneus maintained that the prosecution (plaintiff) did not and could not prove that Honneus had imported Cannabis sativa—the term used to define marijuana in the relevant statute—instead of another species of marijuana. In support of his argument, Honneus called an expert to testify that three species of Cannabis existed and that two of them—Cannabis indica and Cannabis sativa—are found in Jamaica, indicating the possibility that Honneus did not import Cannabis sativa. The district court excluded the expert testimony and denied Honneus’ motions that relied on that testimony, ruling that Congress intended the term Cannabis sativa to encompass all marijuana plants. Honneus appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Campbell, 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 734,000 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 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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 734,000 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
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 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