Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Forrester, No. 09-50029

By FindLaw Staff on January 06, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Defendant's conviction for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute ecstasy are affirmed where: 1) substantive collateral attacks on permanent scheduling orders were impermissible in criminal cases where defendants' sentences would be determined by those scheduling orders; and 2) the district court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment because it tracked the language of the conspiracy statute, identified a location and co-conspirators, and alleged the purpose of the conspiracy. However, defendant's sentence is vacated where the district court made inadequate findings to justify its reliance on a temporary amendment to U.S.S.G. section 2D1.1 that increased ecstasy-related penalties.

Read US v. Forrester, No. 09-50029

Appellate Information

Argued and Submitted November 3, 2009

Filed January 5, 2010


Opinion by Judge Smith


For Appellant:

Benjamin L. Coleman and Ethan A. Baloch, Coleman & Baloch, LLP, San Diego, CA

For Appellee:

Bruce R. Castetter, Todd W. Robinson and Stewart M. Young, Assistant United States Attorneys, San Diego, CA

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard