United States Tenth Circuit

Defendant's convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute are affirmed where: 1) it was unnecessary to address a claim of instructional error as defendant did not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury finding that he had actual knowledge of the presence of cocaine; and 2) defendant's Confrontation Clause claim fails as he did not argue that the district court erred on the two occasions on which it sustained objections to defendant's cross-examination of a witness, and he failed to show that this cross-examination was otherwise limited.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/14/2010
• Published 06/14/2010

Judges

• HARTZ, Circuit Judge., Before HARTZ, BALDOCK, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Kirk Redmond, Assistant Federal Public Defender, (Cyd Gilman, Federal Public Defender, with him on the brief), Kansas City, Kansas, for Defendant-Appellant., Jared S. Maag, Special Assistant United States Attorney, (Lanny D. Welch, United States Attorney), Topeka, Kansas, for Plaintiff-Appellee.