United States v. Roman

356 F. Supp. 434 (1973) (affirmed at 484 F.2d 1271 (1973), 415 U.S. 978 (1974))

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Roman

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
356 F. Supp. 434 (1973) (affirmed at 484 F.2d 1271 (1973), 415 U.S. 978 (1974))

Facts

Heng Roman and Lee Koo (defendants) met in Singapore with another person to discuss their plans to illegally import heroin into the United States. Heng and Koo did not know that the other individual was a federal informer. Heng and Koo picked up the informer’s empty suitcase and returned it to the informer filled with 2.5 kilograms of heroin. Heng drove the informer with his suitcase to the airport for a flight to New York. At the airport, the informer turned over the suitcase, without Heng’s knowledge, to the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD). The informer flew to New York. The BNDD removed the heroin, refilled the suitcase with soap powder, and sent the heroin and the suitcase to New York. Once in New York, the informer picked up the suitcase from the BNDD, placed it in a locker, and then met again with Roman and Koo, who had also arrived in New York. Heng and Koo then offered to sell the heroin to federal agents who were posing as drug buyers. Heng and Koo were arrested and charged with conspiracy and possession of heroin with intent to distribute. Both Heng and Koo were found guilty of conspiracy, and the judge reserved judgment on the charge of possession with intent to distribute. At trial, Heng and Koo claimed a defense of impossibility for the possession with intent to distribute charge, because the suitcase had not in fact contained any heroin.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Bryan, 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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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 832,000 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
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 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