United States v. Chedowry Thomas
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 16001
| 5th Cir. | 2012Background
- Thomas, Davis, and Chapman were convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and, for Thomas and Davis, attempted possession; Chapman was acquitted on the attempt count.
- The government’s evidence showed a drug-trafficking scheme involving Favela in El Paso, Jimenez as a DEA source, and a planned transfer in Missouri.
- Jurors found five kilograms or more of cocaine involved for Thomas and Davis on conspiracy and attempt counts; Chapman was convicted on conspiracy only.
- The district court denied Rule 29 acquittal motions and later held venue improper for the attempt counts in the Western District of Texas.
- Chapman and others challenge venue, admissibility of a voice-identification from a cooperating officer, and certain sentencing determinations based on 15 kilograms of cocaine.
- The court affirms conspiracy convictions and reverses the attempt convictions for lack of proper venue, with corresponding sentencing adjustments for special assessments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of conspiracy evidence | Thomas/Davis/Chapman argue insufficient evidence | Thomas/Davis/Chapman contend no shared objective | Conspiracy ample; convictions affirmed |
| Venue for conspiracy in Western District of Texas | Gov’t showed El Paso origins and involvement | Venue not shown in Texas for conspiracy | Venue proper in Western District of Texas |
| Venue for attempt counts against Thomas and Davis | Gov’t justified venue through continuing-offense theory | No contact by Thomas/Davis with Western District of Texas | Venue improper; convictions reversed as to Thomas and Davis on attempt |
| Admissibility of Bobo’s voice-identification | Identification properly based on extensive contact | Identification’s reliability contested | Admission proper under Rule 901(b)(5); no reversible error on cross-examination limits |
| Sentencing attribution and minor-role adjustment | 15 kg attributed for sentencing; minor-role adjustment denied | Argument on quantity and role contested | 15 kg properly attributed; no clear error on Davis’ minor-role denial; remand not required for sentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ochoa, 667 F.3d 643 (5th Cir. 2012) (conspiracy elements and inferential proof of participation)
- United States v. Zamora, 661 F.3d 200 (5th Cir. 2011) (circumstantial evidence can prove conspiracy; tacit agreement)
- United States v. Curtis, 635 F.3d 704 (5th Cir. 2011) (use of circumstantial evidence to infer conspiracy participation)
- United States v. Burke, 431 F.3d 883 (5th Cir. 2005) (conspiracy offense can be completed even if goods are fake)
- United States v. Carreon-Palacio, 267 F.3d 381 (5th Cir. 2001) (aiding-and-abetting venue considerations in conspiracy context)
- United States v. Kwong-Wah, 924 F.2d 298 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (venue for attempt requires defendant’s own acts; no imputation from coconspirators)