United States v. Walters
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
775 Fed. Appx. 25 (2019)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
Jaquan Walters (defendant) provided Lamar Moorer with a $10 bag of marijuana, but Moorer refused to pay. Moorer punched Walters, and Walters continued the fight, which ended after several minutes. Walters left on his bicycle and retrieved a loaded gun from the roof of a nearby building. Six minutes after the fight ended, Walters returned to the scene. Moorer was unarmed and talking on his cellphone. Walters slowly and purposely pulled the gun out and shot Moorer execution style, firing at least five shots in Moorer’s chest at point-blank range, continuing to shoot even after Moorer had fallen on the ground. Walters was convicted of distributing and possessing with intent to distribute marijuana and of murdering another person with a firearm in relation to drug trafficking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(j)(1). A bench trial took place to determine whether the killing was murder or manslaughter, i.e., whether Walters acted with malice aforethought. The district court found there was malice aforethought and sentenced Walters to 25 years’ imprisonment. Walters appealed, arguing that the government had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was committed with the state of mind necessary for murder.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 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.