United States v. Breac Stewart
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6509
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Breac Stewart and his cousin Hans Schroeder were indicted on (1) conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50+ kg of marijuana, (2) conspiracy to launder money, and (3) racketeering under 18 U.S.C. § 1952; a forfeiture money judgment was sought.
- Evidence at trial: Schroeder testified Stewart supplied and mailed one‑pound heat‑sealed packages from California to Nebraska and coordinated larger interstate transfers.
- Two couriers (Gude and Hermsen) testified they made multiple California–Nebraska trips carrying multi‑pound loads; travel/business records corroborated their testimony.
- Financial evidence: withdrawals of $103,400 from a joint “We Be Lions” account, 29 MoneyGram transfers totalling $64,894, and corroborating FedEx shipping label; Schroeder testified funds from marijuana sales were routed to Stewart and commingled with legitimate business receipts.
- District court denied Stewart’s post‑trial motion for judgment of acquittal; jury convicted on all counts, entered preliminary forfeiture of $168,294, and sentenced Stewart to 48 months’ imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy to distribute ≥50 kg marijuana | Government: testimony and corroborating records show Stewart procured, packaged, shipped, and received proceeds; quantity exceeds 50 kg even on low estimates | Stewart: evidence insufficient; challenges witness credibility and quantity estimates | Affirmed — viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict, a reasonable jury could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt; quantities exceed 50 kg |
| Sufficiency for money‑laundering conspiracy (§1956) | Government: joint bank account, interstate transactions, commingling, use of band name to disguise proceeds, MoneyGram transfers show transactions of illicit proceeds | Stewart: claimed insufficiency; attacked credibility and intent to conceal | Affirmed — evidence sufficient that Stewart agreed to conduct transactions involving illicit proceeds with intent to conceal |
| Sufficiency for racketeering (Travel Act, §1952) | Government: Stewart shipped drugs and received proceeds via mail, traveled interstate to arrange transports, used cell phone to coordinate couriers | Stewart: argued insufficient proof of intent and overt acts in interstate commerce | Affirmed — testimony established interstate travel, mail use, and overt acts to facilitate unlawful activity |
| Credibility of witnesses and reliability for forfeiture amount | Government: relied on testimony plus financial records to support convictions; used records for forfeiture figure | Stewart: emphasized district court’s skepticism about testimony for calculating forfeiture; argued credibility problems undermine convictions | Rejected as to convictions — credibility is for the jury; district court credited that drugs and cash transfers occurred even if it declined to quantify forfeiture by testimony alone |
Key Cases Cited
- Musacchio v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 709 (2016) (standard for reviewing denial of judgment of acquittal; evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdict)
- United States v. Hernandez, 301 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2002) (contrast case where government failed to prove defendant's knowledge of drug trafficking)
- United States v. Slagg, 651 F.3d 832 (8th Cir. 2011) (elements required for conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)(i))
- United States v. Brown, 956 F.2d 782 (8th Cir. 1992) (elements of racketeering offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1952)