This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D was in charge of a crack distribution organization in the Washington, D.C. area. Her indictment and arrest resulted from a domino-effect series of arrests and cooperation agreements involving individuals below her in the organization, each of whom provided evidence regarding people above them. D never handled the cocaine in plain sight. D was eventually arrested and tried. At trial, Jacques Beckwith testified in response to a question from the court that he started obtaining drugs from D in 1982 or 1983, and also that in April or May of 1990 he and D traveled to Minneapolis to sell drugs in that city before relocating to the Washington, D.C. area. At a bench conference prior to the cross-examination of Beckwith, D indicated that he intended to obtain testimony that Beckwith used drugs in order to force people to engage in sexual acts with him and that he used and manipulated them based on their addiction and his access to drugs. D's strategy was to highlight Beckwith's sexuality as part of the effort to impeach his credibility. P objected to this line of questioning, and the district judge sustained the objection. D was convicted and appealed in part on this issue.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.