United States v. Adams
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25360
| 7th Cir. | 2010Background
- Adams arrested June 13, 2006 after disorderly conduct call in East Moline, Illinois.
- CI told officer Adams was a drug dealer with drugs hidden in his rectum; officer found crack and paraphernalia during booking search.
- A total of 5.2 g crack cocaine and 5.9 g powder cocaine were recovered; $861 in cash also found.
- Indictments included possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine and a conspiracy to distribute from at least 2001 through June 13, 2006.
- Jury convicted Adams on both counts; defense relied on self-use theory and stipulations on incarceration dates.
- Court addressed admissibility of evidence, confrontation clause challenges, prosecutorial remarks, and Fair Sentencing Act retroactivity on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 404(b) applicability to evidence | Adams argues prior arrests are propensity evidence. | Evidence is direct evidence of conspiracy, not Rule 404(b) evidence. | Evidence admitted as direct proof, not 404(b). |
| Confrontation Clause errors from CI testimony | Testimony by non-testifying CI violated confrontation clause. | Erroneous but harmless given other strong evidence. | Harmless error as to both June 13 and June 1 CI statements. |
| Prosecutor's improper vouching in closing | Prosecutor vouched for a witness's truthfulness. | Improper but not outcome-determinative. | No reversal; not reversible plain error given strong evidence. |
| Cumulative error | Multiple errors cumulatively denied fair trial. | Cumulative effect prejudicial. | No cumulative$error sufficient to overturn the conviction. |
| FSA retroactivity and resentencing | FSA applies retroactively to reduce sentence. | FSA not retroactive; no resentencing required. | FSA not retroactive; sentence affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Alviar, 573 F.3d 526 (7th Cir. 2009) (Rule 404(b)—conspiracy evidence not excluded as 404(b) material)
- United States v. Penny, 60 F.3d 1257 (7th Cir. 1995) (unexplained wealth probative of conspiracy)
- United States v. Zarnes, 33 F.3d 1454 (7th Cir. 1994) (large drug quantities indicate conspiracy)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997) (unduly prejudicial prior-act evidence; 403 balancing)
- United States v. Avila, 557 F.3d 809 (7th Cir. 2009) (Rule 403 prejudice concerns in prior-act evidence)
- United States v. Silva, 380 F.3d 1018 (7th Cir. 2004) (CI testimony context considerations; confrontation concerns)
- United States v. Castelan, 219 F.3d 690 (7th Cir. 2000) (harmless error analysis for confrontation clause issues)
- United States v. Tolliver, 454 F.3d 660 (7th Cir. 2006) (context requirement for CI testimony)
- United States v. Lovelace, 123 F.3d 650 (7th Cir. 1997) (CI testimony context and police foundation considerations)
- United States v. LeFevour, 798 F.2d 977 (7th Cir. 1986) (plea/character of cooperating witness considerations)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court 2004) (Confrontation Clause—testimonial statements)