a. Pennsylvania

Drug Induced Homicide Defense Toolkit

- Changing the Narrative (https://www.changingthenarrative.news/) - Zealous (https://zealo.us/)

C. Cases

Commonwealth v. Brown, 477 Mass. 805 (2017). Commonwealth v. Jackson, 464 Mass. 758 (2013). Commonwealth v. Carrillo, 131 N.E.3d 812 (Mass. 2019). Commonwealth v. Matchett, 386 Mass. 492 (1982). Florida v. Quinton Redell Sylvestre, No. 4D17-2166 (Fla. 15th Cir. 2018). Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923). Lewis v. State, 474 So.2d 766 (Ala. Ct. Crim. App. 1985). Naperville Smart Meter Awareness v. City of Naperville, No. 16-3755 (7th Cir. 2018). People v. Coots, 968 N.E.2d 1151 (Ill. Ct. App. 2012). People v. Konrad, 536 N.W.2d 517 (Mich. 1995). People v. Morante, 975 P.2d 1071 (1999). People v. Sporleder, 666 P.2d 135 (Co. 1983). People v. White, 325 P. 2d 985 (Cal. 1958) (en banc). People v. XuHui Li, 67 N.Y.S.3d 1 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017), aff’d, 140 N.E.3d 965 (N.Y 2019). Pesce v. Coppinger, 1:18-cv-11972-DJC (slip op’n), (D. Mass. Nov. 28, 2018). Smith v. Aroostook County, 922 F.3d 41 (1st Cir. 2019). State v. Beecroft, 813 N.W.2d 814, 834 (Minn. 2012). State v. Carithers, 490 N.W.2d 620 (Minn. 1992). State v. Greene, 592 N.W.2d 24 (Iowa 1999). State v. Morrison, 902 A.2d 860 (N.J. 2006). State v. Schnagl, 907 N.W.2d 188 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). State v. Shell, 501 S.W.3d 22 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016). Tracey v. State, 152 So. 3d 504 (Fla. 2014). United States v. Alvarado, 816 F.3d 242(4th Cir. 2016). United States v. Burkholder, 816 F.3d 607 (10th Cir. 2016). United States v. Burrage, 571 U.S. 204 (2014). United States v. Carpenter, 585 U.S. ____, No. 16-402 (Jun. 22, 2018). United States v. Hatfield, 591 F.3d 945 (7th Cir. 2010). United States v. Mancuso, 718 F.3d 780 (9th Cir. 2013).

114

Disclaimer: All content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice

Drug Induced Homicide Defense Toolkit

United States v. Reynoso, Case 1:17-cr-10350-NMG (D. Mass. Jun. 24, 2019) (prosecution's sentencing memo). United States v. Rodriguez, 279 F.3d 947 (11th Cir. 2002). United States v. Speer, 30 F.3d 605 (5th Cir. 1994). United States v. Swiderski, 548 F.2d 445 (2d Cir. 1977). United States v. Wallace, 532 F.3d 126 (2d Cir. 2008). United States v. Washington, 41 F.3d 917 (4th Cir. 1994). United States v. Webb, 655 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2011). United States v. Wright, 593 F.2d 105 (1979). Weldon v. United States, 840 F.3d 865(7th Cir. 2016). Zanuccoli v. United States, 459 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D. Mass. 2006).

a. Pennsylvania

● Commonwealth v. Arrington, 247 A.3d 456 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2021) (holding that conspiracy to commit involuntary manslaughter in a DDRD context is a cognizable offense in Pennsylvania and venue is proper either in the county where drugs are purchased or the death occurs). ● Commonwealth v. Peck, 242 A.3d 1274 (Pa. 2020) (reversing a DDRD conviction when the drug delivery occurred outside the state). ● Commonwealth v. Burton, 234 A.3d 824 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020) (finding sufficient evidence to support the defendant's DDRD's conviction and affirming denial of motion to suppress cell-site location information). ● Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 228 A.3d 577 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020) (finding the defendant had intentionally waived his appellate rights during plea negotiations in a DDRD case). ● Commonwealth v. Beatty, 227 A.3d 1277 (Pa. Super. 2020) (remanding for resentencing when the trial court failed to provide reasoning for a sentence outside guidelines). ● Commonwealth v. Carr, 227 A.3d 11 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020) (holding conspiracy to commit drug delivery resulting in death as a cognizable crime and finding defendant constructively possessed the drugs in question when he ordered their sale by phone from within prison). ● Commonwealth v. Graham, 196 A.3d 661 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2018) (holding that venue is proper both in the county where the drug delivery occurs and in the county where the death occurs).

Version Date July 2021 – Check https://ssrn.com/abstract=3265510 for most current edition

115