21 U.S.C. § 965

Applicability of part E of subchapter I

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

Part E of subchapter I shall apply with respect to functions of the Attorney General (and of officers and employees of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs) under this subchapter, to administrative and judicial proceedings under this subchapter, and to violations of this subchapter, to the same extent that such part applies to functions of the Attorney General (and such officers and employees) under subchapter I, to such proceedings under subchapter I, and to violations of subchapter I. For purposes of the application of this section to section 880 or 881 of this title, any reference in such section 880 or 881 of this title to “this subchapter” shall be deemed to be a reference to this subchapter, any reference to section 823 of this title shall be deemed to be a reference to section 958 of this title, and any reference to section 822(d) of this title shall be deemed to be a reference to section 957(b)(2) of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1980–2001 · leading case: United States v. Edward Rodriguez, A/K/A Rick, Thomas J. Albernaz, Peter Smigowski, & William John Martins, 612 F.2d 906 (5th Cir. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Edward Rodriguez, A/K/A Rick, Thomas J. Albernaz, Peter Smigowski, & William John Martins, 612 F.2d 906 (5th Cir. 1980). “§ 963] — relating to attempts and conspiracies — and section 1015 [now 21 USCA § 965] — relating to the applicability of title II enforcement and administrative provisions — will take effect at the same time as the comparable provisions of title II.”

United States v. Louis Darnell Gordon, 638 F.2d 886 (5th Cir. 1981). · cites it 2× “” 4 Gordon’s argument that § 881(f) does not apply because the marijuana was seized under sub-chapter II of the Act ignores 21 U.S.C. § 965 (1976) 5 (in effect when Gordon was arrested): “Part E of subchapter I [ 29 U.”

Emmens v. United States, 44 Fed. Cl. 524 (Fed. Cl. 1999). · cites it 3× “Section 965, contained within Sub-chapter II of the Drug Abuse Prevention and Control chapter of Title 21, concerns the import and export of controlled substances.”

State v. Dunn, 803 P.2d 917 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “[3] 21 U.S.C. § 965 , which extends Part E of subchapter I of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, to subchapter II, is irrelevant because 21 U.”

United States v. Perkins, 177 F. Supp. 2d 570 (W.D. Tex. 2001). “21 U.S.C. § 965 . Therefore, § 871(a) permits the delegation of more than mere administrative and managerial duties.”

United States v. $184,505.01 in U.S. Currency, 72 F.3d 1160 (3rd Cir. 1995). “21 U.S.C. § 965 ; see also United States v.”

Extraterritorial Effect of the Posse Comitatus Act (OLC 1989). “The 1988 Amendments In 1988, Congress substantially modified the provisions o f the 1981 Act applicable to the use o f military personnel to assist in the enforcement of 14Pursuant to 21 U S.C. § 965, the subchapter o f title 21 that includes section 873(b) also applies to the…”

Auth. of the Customs Serv. to Seize or Forfeit Prop. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881 (OLC 1988). “§ 873 (b) provides m pertinent part that “when requested by the Attorney General, it shall be the duty of any agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government to furnish assistance, including technical advice, to him for canying out his functions under this subchapter ” See…”

Importation of Morphine Sulfate for Placement in the Nat'l Def. Stockpile (OLC 1982). “§ 960 , and forfeiture to the United States, 21 U.S.C. §§ 965 , 880. Both penalties are inappropriate for application to the United States.”

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.