United States v. Keith Carr, 695 F. App'x 953

Keith Carr was charged (indictment returned Dec. 6, 2011) with conspiracy to distribute >1 kg of heroin; trial began June 3, 2013.
Investigation included controlled buys, wiretaps, and surveillance; two co-conspirators testified for the government under plea agreements that they packaged and sold multiple kilograms of heroin at Carr’s direction.
On Dec. 12, 2011 the government filed a §851 Information seeking a 20-year mandatory minimum based on a 2002 Illinois narcotics conviction; a clerk’s office clerical error removed the docket entry the following day.
Defense counsel and Carr were aware of and referenced the Information during plea negotiations and a motion to continue; Carr did not contest the mandatory minimum at trial.
After conviction, the court found Carr responsible for >3 kg of heroin and applied a four-level leadership enhancement; Carr was sentenced to the 240-month mandatory minimum and appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence	Government: testimony, wiretaps, surveillance and controlled buys support conviction	Carr: evidence insufficient for conspiracy conviction	Affirmed — evidence, including co-conspirator testimony and recordings, was sufficient
Impeachment of co-conspirator	Gov: Rules of evidence limit stale convictions; district court acted within discretion	Carr: should be allowed to impeach witness with 1997 attempted-murder conviction	Affirmed — conviction too remote under Fed. R. Evid. 609(b); no exceptional circumstances
Validity/use of §851 Information	Gov: Information was filed and served; defendant had notice despite docket error	Carr: clerical removal nullified government’s reliance on the Information	Affirmed — filing and service satisfied §851(a); defendant was not prejudiced by clerk error
Sentencing findings (quantity, leadership)	Gov: enhancements supported by record	Carr: challenges factual findings underpinning enhancements	Not reached on merits — any error harmless because mandatory minimum controlled sentence

United States v. Orozco-Vasquez, 469 F.3d 1101 (insufficiency review standard; view evidence in light most favorable to government)
United States v. Moore, 425 F.3d 1061 (difficulty of prevailing on insufficiency claims)
United States v. Frazier, 213 F.3d 409 (standard describing burden for defendants in sufficiency challenges)
United States v. Beverly, 913 F.2d 337 (conviction may rest on circumstantial evidence and testimony of accomplices)
United States v. Molinaro, 877 F.2d 1341 (accomplice testimony admissibility and reliability context)
United States v. Rogers, 542 F.3d 197 (Rule 609(b) — convictions beyond ten years admissible only in rare circumstances)
Barber v. City of Chicago, 725 F.3d 702 (distinguishing crimes that are probative of dishonesty)
United States v. Woods, 233 F.3d 482 (harmless-error principle when mandatory minimum controls sentence)