Read US v. Brown, 05-3296, 05-3428, 05-3456

Convictions and sentences for methamphetamine-related offenses, as well as various rulings, are affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) sufficiency of the evidence; 2) denial of a motion to exclude testimony of an expert witness concerning normal or expected sales of pseudoephedrine by a traditional convenience store; 3) jury instruction; 4) a sentence enhancement for obstruction of justice; and 5) denial of a motion to quash a search warrant and to suppress evidence found in that search.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/29/2006
• Published 08/29/2006

Judges

• JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge., Before ARNOLD, JOHN R. GIBSON, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• 05-3296, USA v Maynard F. Brown, was submitted on the briefs with oral argument.  Shane Cantin, Springfield, MO, represented appellant.   Randall D. Eggert, AUSA, Springfield, MO represented the appellee., 05-3428, USA v. DavidL. Deputy, was argued before this court on March 13, 2006.   Counsel who represented appellant Deputy was Margaret E. Barker, Springfield.   MO. Counsel who represented appellee was Randall D. Eggert, AUSA, Springfield, MO., 05-3456, USA v Monty Camden, was argued before this court on March 13, 2006.   Counsel who represented appellant Camden was Michael Baker, Springfield, MO. Counsel who represented appellee was Randall D. Eggert, ausa, Springfield, MO.