The jury's verdict rejecting defendant's agency defense was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was nothing in the undercover officer's testimony that supported an agency defense, and defendant's own testimony undermined that defense. Defendant admitted his motive in obtaining drugs for the undercover officer was purely economic rather than social, in that his sole purpose was to acquire free drugs. "The defense of agency...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
