United States v. Eldred Claybrooks
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18550
7th Cir.2013Background
- FBI wiretaps and recordings of Robert Atkins’ phones captured numerous calls between Atkins and Eldred Claybrooks about cocaine transactions; Atkins was a large-scale supplier and key government witness.
- Atkins testified he supplied Claybrooks and sold on consignment for ~7 years, allowing returns if Claybrooks couldn’t retail the cocaine; Atkins estimated he provided 20–30 kg total and that Claybrooks supplied him kilos on several occasions.
- Recordings included brokering a 2‑kg deal and discussions about customers testing/returning portions of kilograms.
- A grand jury indicted Claybrooks on (1) conspiracy to distribute 5 kg or more of cocaine (21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1)) and (2) distribution of 500 g or more; the jury convicted on both counts and found quantity for each count was between 500 g and <5 kg.
- The PSR attributed at least 7 kg to Claybrooks based on Atkins’ testimony and co‑defendant proffers; probation recommended a 20‑year mandatory minimum based on that and prior conviction.
- At sentencing the district court rejected Atkins’ 20–30 kg estimate as too indefinite, said it was “pretty secure” with the PSR’s 5–15 kg range without explaining the factual basis, and imposed the 20‑year mandatory minimum. Claybrooks appealed conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy conviction | Claybrooks: evidence shows only isolated transactions, not an agreement to conspire | Government: consignment arrangement, long‑term dealing, brokering, and recorded advice support an agreement to distribute | Affirmed — evidence (consignment sales, agency/brokering, recordings, long cooperation) sufficient for a reasonable jury to infer conspiracy |
| District court drug‑quantity finding at sentencing | Claybrooks: court failed to make an explicit, supported drug‑quantity finding; must adopt jury’s quantity for mandatory minimum | Government: court reasonably relied on PSR and Atkins’ testimony to find larger quantity | Vacated sentence — district court clearly erred by not making an explicit, supported quantity finding and by relying on an unexplained 5–15 kg compromise |
| Effect of Alleyne on mandatory minimum | Claybrooks: jury’s special verdict (≥500 g but <5 kg) fixes mandatory minimum at 10 years under Alleyne | Government: urged larger quantity based on judge’s finding | Court: Alleyne requires jury findings control mandatory minimum; jury’s quantity sets 10‑year minimum; district court cannot raise mandatory minimum based on judge‑found facts |
| Remand instructions | Claybrooks: resentencing required with explicit quantity finding and Alleyne compliance | Government: request for resentencing with district court’s quantity finding maintained | Remand for resentencing: district court must make an explicit drug‑quantity finding (for Guidelines) and set mandatory minimum consistent with the jury verdict/Alleyne |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Tavarez, 626 F.3d 902 (7th Cir. 2010) (standard of review for sufficiency challenges)
- United States v. Vallar, 635 F.3d 271 (7th Cir. 2011) (distinguishing agreement to distribute from isolated deals)
- United States v. Johnson, 592 F.3d 749 (7th Cir. 2010) (consignment sales strongly indicative of conspiracy)
- United States v. Carrillo, 435 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2006) (circumstantial evidence may prove conspiracy)
- United States v. Rollins, 544 F.3d 820 (7th Cir. 2008) (elements of conspiracy)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (facts increasing mandatory minimum must be found by a jury)
- United States v. Palmer, 248 F.3d 569 (7th Cir. 2001) (requirement that sentencing court make explicit drug‑quantity finding)
- United States v. Dean, 574 F.3d 836 (7th Cir. 2009) (adopting PSR findings and when court statements contradict PSR)
- United States v. Jarrett, 133 F.3d 519 (7th Cir. 1998) (requiring explanation of methodology/evidence for drug‑quantity estimates)