United States v. Douglas Pittman
696 F. App'x 609
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- On April 15–16, 2015, Pittman stayed in a Greensboro Sheraton hotel; security smelled marijuana in his room. Police later searched the room and found marijuana, a digital scale, suspected cocaine/cocaine‑base, a Smith & Wesson semiautomatic pistol, counterfeit money cuttings, scissors, and additional counterfeit bills.
- The next day Pittman used $230 in ten‑dollar bills at a mall Champs store; employees suspected the bills were counterfeit and police later found $720 in counterfeit currency on Pittman.
- Pittman lied about his identity and how he obtained the money, and police seized his phone which contained a video of him rapping and waving a gun resembling the one recovered from the hotel room.
- Pittman was indicted on five counts: possession of counterfeit currency with intent to defraud; possession with intent to distribute marijuana; possession with intent to distribute cocaine base (28+ g threshold); possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug‑trafficking crime; and felon‑in‑possession of a firearm.
- At trial the district court admitted the cell‑phone video under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) for intent/knowledge (with a limiting instruction). The jury convicted on all counts; Pittman appealed arguing (1) the video admission was an abuse of discretion and (2) insufficient evidence supported the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Pittman’s Argument | Government’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of cell‑phone video under Rule 404(b) | Video had no probative value of possession/knowledge of the firearm and was unduly prejudicial | Video showed prior possession/connection to same or similar firearm, probative of knowledge/intent; limiting instruction would mitigate prejudice | Admission affirmed: court did not abuse discretion; video relevant to intent/knowledge, reliable, and not unfairly prejudicial |
| Sufficiency for counterfeit currency (18 U.S.C. § 472) | Evidence did not prove knowing possession with intent to defraud | Circumstantial evidence (behavior in store, told clerk not to check, sweating/fidgety, lying to police, spent counterfeit bills) supports knowledge and intent | Conviction affirmed: substantial evidence supported elements of knowing possession and intent to defraud |
| Sufficiency for marijuana possession with intent to distribute (21 U.S.C. § 841) | Multiple occupants of room and lack of exclusive control negate constructive possession | Constructive (not exclusive) possession established by hotel occupancy, security smell, Pittman’s admission he smoked marijuana, items found near him and in his bags | Conviction affirmed: constructive possession and intent to distribute supported by circumstantial evidence |
| Sufficiency for cocaine‑base weight and firearm charges (21 U.S.C. § 841 and 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g), 924(c)) | Weight argument: government must separate cocaine base from powder; claimed firearm belonged to someone else | Statute permits weighing the entire mixture containing detectable cocaine base; circumstantial evidence supports constructive possession of gun and possession in furtherance of trafficking (proximity, video, evasive conduct) | Convictions affirmed: statute allows mixture weight; sufficient evidence of constructive possession, felon‑in‑possession, and firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Queen, 132 F.3d 991 (4th Cir.) (standard for reviewing Rule 404(b) admission)
- United States v. Haney, 914 F.2d 602 (4th Cir.) (Rule 404(b) review not overturned unless arbitrary/irrational)
- United States v. Siegel, 536 F.3d 306 (4th Cir.) (reliability and Rule 403 prejudice analysis)
- Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 (1924) (standard for sufficiency review — view evidence in light most favorable to Government)
- United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849 (4th Cir.) (definition of substantial evidence in criminal cases)
- United States v. Jackson, 863 F.2d 1168 (4th Cir.) (circumstantial evidence treated same as direct evidence)
- Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978) (appellate reversal for insufficient evidence confined to clear prosecution failure)
- United States v. Leftenant, 341 F.3d 338 (4th Cir.) (elements for counterfeit‑currency conviction)
- United States v. Teague, 737 F.2d 378 (4th Cir.) (prior firearm possession relevant to intent)
- Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453 (1991) (include carrier/mixture weight when determining drug quantity)
- United States v. Davis, [citation="278 F. App'x 263"] (4th Cir.) (entire mixture weight may be used when multiple forms of cocaine present)