United States v. Fagan
676 F. App'x 16
2d Cir.2017Background
- Kevin Fagan was arrested at JFK after flying from St. Lucia with a checked suitcase containing a false bottom that hid ~3 kg of cocaine.
- He was charged and convicted by a jury of importation and possession with intent to distribute cocaine; sentenced to 1 year and one day (served) and three years supervised release.
- Fagan admitted the suitcase was his, that he packed and checked it, and denied receiving items in transit or having anyone else transport it.
- At customs, Fagan could not provide reliable contact information for the person he claimed to visit and had phone entries indicating an airport hotel.
- He exhibited nervous behavior during the search (including turning his back as the bag search intensified).
- On appeal Fagan challenged only the sufficiency of the evidence that he knew the concealed substance was a controlled substance (cocaine).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove defendant knew the concealed substance was cocaine | Government: circumstantial evidence (sole dominion of bag, false statements, nervousness, travel inconsistencies) supports knowledge | Fagan: evidence insufficient to prove he knew the substance was a controlled substance | Affirmed — a rational jury could infer knowledge from sole possession plus suspicious circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency review)
- McFadden v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2298 (knowledge may be proven by circumstantial evidence)
- United States v. Harvey, 746 F.3d 87 (sufficiency review standard in Second Circuit)
- United States v. Davis, 690 F.3d 127 (guilty knowledge may be established circumstantially)
- United States v. Anderson, 747 F.3d 51 (sole possession of valuable contraband supports inference of knowledge)
- United States v. Tran, 519 F.3d 98 (nervousness/false statements plus control over container supports knowledge inference)
- United States v. Forlorma, 94 F.3d 91 (possession of narcotics in baggage plus ownership assertions and visible nervousness sufficient)
- United States v. Torres, 604 F.3d 58 (distinguished; defendant lacked sole dominion)
- United States v. Samaria, 239 F.3d 228 (distinguished; defendant had supporting role)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 392 F.3d 539 (distinguished; supporting role rather than sole control)