This is my question/prompt"write the prediction as to whether Nansen or Byrd is likely to be convicted of criminal sale of a controlled substance using the IRAC method." For simplicity's sake, pretend that none of the elements referenced in the exercise have been previously interpreted by the courts.

Case information: You've interviewed Nansen, who lives with Byrd Neither is a licensed physician or a licensed pharmacist. At about noon on July 15, both were arrested and charged with criminal sale of a controlled substance. Nansen has told you the following: Byrd keeps a supply of cocaine in our apartment. He had been out of town for a month, and I had used up his stash while he was gone. I knew that was going to bend Byrd completely out of shape, but I thought I was going to get away with it. I had replaced it all with plaster. When you grind plaster down real fine, it looks like coke. For other reasons, I had decided to go to Alaska on an afternoon flight on July 15 and not come back. Byrd was supposed to get back into town on July 16, and by the time he figured out what had happened, I'd be in the Tongass Forest. But on the morning of the 15th, Byrd opened the door of the apartment and walked in, saying he had decided to come back a day early. I hadn't started packing yet I wouldn't have much to pack anyway but I didn't know how I was going to pack with Byrd standing around because of all the explaining I'd have to do. I also didn't want Byrd hanging around the apartment and working up an urge for some cocaine that wasn't there. So I said, "Let's go hang out on the street/ We had been on the sidewalk about ten or fifteen minutes when a guy came up to us and started talking. He was dressed a little too well to be a regular street person, but he looked kind of desperate. I figured he was looking to buy some drugs. Then I realized that that was the solution to at least some of my problem.

I took Byrd aside and said, "This guy looks like he's ready to buy big. What do you think he'd pay for your stash?" Byrd looked reluctant, so I turned to the guy and said,"We can sell you about three ounces of coke, but we have to have a thousand for it."When the guy said,"Yeah,"Byrd said,"Wait here"and ran inside the apartment building. A thousand was far more than the stuff was worth. Byrd walked out onto the stoop with the whole stash in his hand in the zip-lock bag he kept it in. While he was walking down the steps, about ten feet away from me and the guy who wanted to buy, two uniforms appeared out of nowhere and arrested Byrd and me. The guy, turned out to be Officer D'Asconni, an undercover policeman who will testify to the conversation Nansen has described. The police laboratory reports that the bag contained 2.8 ounces of plaster and 0.007 ounces of cocaine. When you told Nansen about the laboratory report, he said the following: I didn't think there was any coke in that bag. What they found must have been residue I had used up every last bit of Byrd's stuff. I clearly remember looking at that empty bag after I had used it all and wondering how much plaster to put in it so that it would at least look like the coke Byrd had left behind. I certainly didn't see any point in scrubbing the bag with cleanser before I put the plaster in it.

Extra Details of Elements of the Case: Exercise A. With the aid of 16 and 221 ofthe Criminal Code (below), breakdown the rule in 220 into a list of elements and exceptions. Annotate the list by adding definitions for the elements (and for any exceptions you might come across). Under each element you list, leave lots of white space. When you do the second part ofthis exercise, you will need room to write more. Criminal Code 16: When a term describing a kind of intent or knowledge appears in a statute defining a crime, that term applies to every element ofthe crime unless the definition ofthe crime clearly indicates that the term is meant to apply only to certain elements and not to others. CriminalCode 220: A person is guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance when he knowingly sells any quantity of a controlled substance Criminal Code 221(a): As used in section 220 of this code, "sell" means to exchange for goods or money, to give, or to offer or agree to do the same, except where the seller is a licensed physician dispensing the controlled substance pursuant to a permit issued by the Drug Enforcement Commission or where the seller is a licensed pharmacist dispensing the controlled substance as directed by a prescription issued by a licensed physician pursuant to a permit issued by the Drug Enforcement Commission.

Criminal Code 221 (b): As used in section 220, "controlled substance,/includes any of the following:.. .cocaine.... You've been asked to determine whether Nansen or Byrd is likely to be convicted of criminal sale of a controlled substance. The question isn't whether Nansen or Byrd criminally sold a controlled substance, but whether either of them is likely to be convicted of doing that. To make that prediction, take into account 10(a) of the Criminal Code. Criminal Code 10(a): No person shall be convicted of a crime except on evidence proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Using your annotated outline of elements, decide whether each element can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and whether any exceptions are satisfied. Then make your prediction. Finally, decide the order in which the elements would best be explored in the Discussion section of an office memo.

My Answers and how to improve? "Introduction

In the case at hand, Nansen and Byrd have been charged with the criminal sale of a controlled substance. This analysis examines whether the prosecution can secure a conviction based on the facts provided. By applying the IRAC methodIssue, Rule, Application, and Conclusionwe will determine the likelihood of conviction for both Nansen and Byrd.

Issue

The central issue is whether Nansen and Byrd can be convicted of the criminal sale of a controlled substance when the substance sold was primarily plaster with a trace amount of cocaine, and both individuals participated in the sale with varying degrees of knowledge and intent.

Rule

Under criminal law, the sale of a controlled substance is defined as the act of knowingly selling a drug that is regulated under drug enforcement laws, such as cocaine. According to relevant statutes, a person can be convicted if they intentionally and unlawfully sell a substance classified as a controlled substance. Importantly, the law also includes provisions for substances that are represented as drugs, even if they are not the actual controlled substance, provided that the seller intended to deceive the buyer.

To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. Intent: The defendant must have intended to sell a controlled substance.
2. Substance: The item sold must be a controlled substance or a substance represented as such.
3. Knowledge: The defendant must have been aware of the nature of the substance being sold.

Application

Nansen: Nansen's defense may argue that he believed he was selling plaster rather than cocaine, as he had replaced Byrd's stash of cocaine with plaster. However, his actions demonstrate the intent to deceive. Nansen actively suggested the sale, negotiated the price, and represented the plaster as cocaine to the undercover officer. The fact that a trace amount of cocaine was found in the bag further complicates Nansen's defense. Although he claims not to have known about the residue, his knowledge that the bag previously contained cocaine, combined with his decision not to clean it, indicates recklessness regarding the substance's composition. Under the law, Nansen's representation of the plaster as cocaine, coupled with the trace cocaine found, meets the requirements for a conviction.

Byrd: Byrd's involvement presents a more complex situation. Initially reluctant to sell the substance, Byrd ultimately participated by retrieving and presenting the bag to the undercover officer. While Byrd may argue that he was unaware of the substitution of plaster for cocaine, his actions suggest otherwise. By handling the bag and bringing it to the officer, Byrd exhibited the requisite intent and knowledge for the sale of a controlled substance. The presence of cocaine residue in the bag also ties Byrd to the illegal sale. Even if he was unaware of Nansen's tampering, Byrd's actions in presenting the bag as containing cocaine fulfill the elements required for a conviction.

Conclusion

Based on the facts and applicable legal standards, both Nansen and Byrd are likely to be convicted of the criminal sale of a controlled substance. Nansen's intent to deceive by selling plaster as cocaine, coupled with the presence of cocaine residue, meets the legal criteria for conviction. Similarly, Byrd's participation in the sale, despite potential ignorance of the plaster substitution, shows sufficient intent and knowledge to satisfy the elements of the crime. Therefore, the prosecution stands a strong chance of securing convictions for both individuals.

This structured paper follows the IRAC method, clearly identifying the legal issue, explaining the relevant rules, applying those rules to the facts, and drawing a logical conclusion based on the analysis."