5
Shared Docs
2
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t
ty; and Third : that the Defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity. Eleventh Cir. Pattern Jury Instr., Offense Instr. 70.4 (2003). EFTA00229860
that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t
ty; and Third : that the Defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity. Eleventh Cir. Pattern Jury Instr., Offense Instr. 70.4 (2003). a l Tobon-Builes was decided prior to the enactment of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a), which created a crimin
that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t
Page: EFTA02857732_p3 →: that the Defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity. EFTA02857761 Eleventh Cir. Pattern Jury Instr., Offense Instr. 70.4 (2003). F Tobon-Bitiles was decided prior to the enactment of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a), which created a crimina
Page: EFTA02857732_p31 →that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t
Page: EFTA02857763_p3 →ty; and Third : that the Defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity. Eleventh Cir. Pattern Jury Instr., Offense Instr. 70.4 (2003). F Tobon-Builes was decided prior to the enactment of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a), which created a criminal
Page: EFTA02857763_p47 →that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t
Page: EFTA02857810_p3 →ty; and Third : that the Defendant engaged in the financial transaction with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity. Eleventh Cir. Pattern Jury Instr., Offense Instr. 70.4 (2003). a lTobon-Builes was decided prior to the enactment of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a), which created a crimina
Page: EFTA02857810_p29 →Entities connected to both Jones Court and Eleventh Cir

Jencks
PERSONthe Sentencing Commission
ORGANIZATIONEllis
PERSONDrury
PERSONOffense Instr
ORGANIZATIONthe Ninth Circuit
ORGANIZATIONAnn Sanchez
PERSONGerald Lefcourt
PERSON
Alexander Acosta
PERSONRoy Black
PERSONLeon Black
PERSONEmmy Taylor
PERSONthe Florida Legislature
ORGANIZATION
United States
LOCATION
Naomi Campbell
PERSONGarcia-Lopez
PERSONJanusz Banasiak
PERSON
Robert Maxwell
PERSON
Philadelphia
LOCATIONMAUSA
ORGANIZATION