![United States v. Lemaux](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![United States v. Lemaux](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
United States v. Lemaux
C09.45586; 994 F.2d 684 (1993)
-
- USD 0.99
-
- USD 0.99
Descripción editorial
NOONAN, Circuit Judge: Kimbel LeMaux appeals his conviction of conducting a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848. A CCE violation requires, inter alia, proof that the accused took part in three or more predicate offenses and supervised five or more persons in the alleged illegal narcotics activity. United States v. Hernandez-Escarsega, 886 F.2d 1560, 1573 (9th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 497 U.S. 1003, 111 L. Ed. 2d 748, 110 S. Ct. 3237 (1990). We have dealt with other aspects of this case in an unpublished memorandum issued separately. Here we focus on LeMaux's contention that the jury should have been instructed that it must agree unanimously on the supervisees and on predicate acts necessary to constitute a continuing criminal enterprise. We affirm the conviction.