Orozco v. United States

How later courts describe this case

• indicating that in a case where there were two objects of a conspiracy with different penalties contained in one count, a special verdict is appropriate to determine which object the jury found to be supported by the evidence
• finding that 70% non-response rate did not violate Jury Act
• “ ‘the knowing supply of a raw material necessary for the commission of a crime by another constitutes aiding and abetting that crime.’ ”
• money laundering after actual delivery of drugs is sufficient in proving a conspiracy to aid and abet drug distribution
• defendant challenges clerk's application of the federal jury selection act