State v. Allan

Summary

The court held that Connecticut conspiracy law already incorporates the principle that a mere buyer-seller relationship, without more, does not establish conspiracy to distribute narcotics. It nevertheless affirmed the conviction because the evidence, viewed cumulatively, showed that the defendant and his supplier agreed to a continuing drug-distribution plan, rather than engaging in only a single purchase. The evidence included the defendant's repeated street sales, his request for a drug resupply, his relationship with the supplier, and conduct consistent with coordinated distribution.