21 U.S.C. § 2

DECLARATION OF EMERGING THREAT.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 21 CasesGoogle Scholar

“(a)In General.—Congress declares methamphetamine an emerging drug threat, as defined in section 702 of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 (21 U.S.C. 1701), in the United States.“(b)Required Emerging Threat Response Plan.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Mar. 14, 2022], the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall establish and implement an Emerging Threat Response Plan that is specific to methamphetamine in accordance with section 709(d) of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 (21 U.S.C. 1708(d)).”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 46 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1930–2026 · leading case: United States v. Morris D. Hunt, 272 F.3d 488 (7th Cir. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Morris D. Hunt, 272 F.3d 488 (7th Cir. 2001). “He was convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and crack cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 2 , 841(a)(1) and 846, 1 and convicted of money laundering under 18 U.”

United States v. Emilio Corona-Chavez, 328 F.3d 974 (8th Cir. 2003). “§§ 841 (a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846 (2000), and 21 U.S.C. § 2 (2000) (attempt and conspiracy).”

United States v. Roger Glen Grayson, United States of Am. v. John Scott MacGregor, 597 F.2d 1225 (9th Cir. 1979). “§§ 952 (a), 960(a)(1), and aiding and abetting in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 2 . The evidence was clearly sufficient.”

United States v. King, 73 F.3d 1564 (11th Cir. 1996). “Count 1 charged each defendant with attempting to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 846. Count 2 charged each defendant with conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.”

United States v. Raymond Derosa, Alfred Ponticelli, Danny Desantis, Phil Bertman, 670 F.2d 889 (9th Cir. 1982). “§ 1962 (c) (1976) 1 and with various narcotics violations under 21 U.S.C. §§ 2 , 841, 846 (1976). 2 After Dino D’Agostino, a fifth defendant, pleaded guilty, the remaining four-defendants proceeded to trial on the following counts.”

United States v. Edmonds, 9 F. App'x 330 (6th Cir. 2001). “Edmonds was charged with one count of conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute marijuana, a violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 2 , 841, 846; and two counts of manufacturing marijuana, violations of 21 *331 U.”

United States v. Warwick, 149 F. App'x 464 (6th Cir. 2005). “The indictment also alleged that each defendant aided and abetted the other in the crimes in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 2 . JA 8-12. On July 8, 2004, Donald Warwick entered into a plea agreement.”

United States v. Greenbaum, 138 F.2d 437 (3rd Cir. 1943). “In construing Section 2 of the Food and Drugs Act of 1906, 21 U.S.C.A. § 2 , courts have held that guilty knowledge was not necessary to sustain a conviction.”

United States v. Jeron Gaskin, 587 F. App'x 290 (6th Cir. 2014). “§§ 841 (a)(1) and 846, and two counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, 21 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced him to 360 months’ imprisonment.”

United States v. Douglas Roseby, 454 F. App'x 186 (4th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “PER CURIAM: Douglas Roseby appeals his convictions and 420-month sentence after a jury convicted him of one count each of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 2 , 841 (West 1999 & Supp.”

Border Pipe Line Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 171 F.2d 149 (D.C. Cir. 1948). “768 (1906) , 21 U.S.C.A. § 2 — “from any foreign country, or shipment to any foreign country”.”

United States v. Lee, 107 F.2d 522 (7th Cir. 1939). “See 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 2 , 9, 10; see also Secs. 1 and ,7.”

Show all 46 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.