United States v. Michael Cox, Jr.
672 F. App'x 517
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Michael Warren Cox Jr. convicted by jury of conspiracy to possess with intent to manufacture and distribute methamphetamine (21 U.S.C. § 846) and sentenced, inter alia, to life imprisonment.
- Evidence at trial showed Cox purchased methamphetamine from at least two people, sold it to numerous buyers, and distributed with a co-defendant (McKenzie); buyers stored, repackaged, and distributed drugs for the operation.
- Cox preserved a claim that evidence was insufficient; other claims (prosecutorial remarks, special conditions) were not objected to at trial and were reviewed for plain error.
- At sentencing the court referenced special conditions of supervised release listed in the PSR rather than reciting each one orally; Cox did not object at that time.
- Special conditions challenged on substantive-reasonableness grounds required financial disclosure to probation and obtaining a GED; the court tied these conditions to § 3553(a) sentencing objectives.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence for conspiracy conviction | Evidence showed only discrete buy/sell transactions, insufficient to prove agreement to conspire | Circumstantial evidence (multiple suppliers, distribution with McKenzie, buyer participation) established agreement, knowledge, and voluntary participation | Conviction affirmed; evidence sufficient when viewed favorably to the Government |
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument | Government made improper remarks (about McKenzie's absence, factual errors, subpoena power) that prejudiced jury | Remarks responded to defense argument, were based on trial evidence, did not attack counsel or imply defendant’s silence; any error not prejudicial | No plain error; remarks not improper or not sufficiently prejudicial to affect outcome |
| Conflict between oral and written judgments re: special conditions | Oral judgment referenced PSR rather than pronouncing each special condition, creating a conflict/error | PSR was provided to parties, written judgment matched PSR; defendant had opportunity to object at sentencing | No plain error; no conflict and defendant aware of recommended conditions |
| Substantive reasonableness of special conditions (financial disclosure; GED) | Conditions are unreasonable, especially given life sentence (may never be on supervised release) | Conditions reasonably relate to § 3553(a) goals (payment for treatment/testing, need for education/vocational training) | No plain error; conditions reasonably related to sentencing goals; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Alaniz, 726 F.3d 586 (5th Cir.) (standard for de novo review of preserved sufficiency claims)
- United States v. Romans, 823 F.3d 299 (5th Cir.) (sufficiency-of-the-evidence review and conspiracy elements)
- United States v. Delgado, 672 F.3d 320 (5th Cir. en banc) (multiple agreements vs. single buy/sell issue)
- United States v. Zamora, 661 F.3d 200 (5th Cir.) (circumstantial evidence inferring agreement)
- United States v. Rashad, 687 F.3d 637 (5th Cir.) (plain-error review for unpreserved prosecutorial misconduct claims)
- United States v. Wall, 389 F.3d 457 (5th Cir.) (limits on commenting about defendant’s right not to testify and related argument)
- United States v. Palmer, 37 F.3d 1080 (5th Cir.) (scope of permissible prosecutor argument)
- United States v. Anderson, 755 F.3d 782 (5th Cir.) (juror instruction mitigating prosecutorial remarks)
- United States v. Reagan, 725 F.3d 471 (5th Cir.) (prejudice standard for prosecutorial remarks affecting verdict)
- United States v. Rouland, 726 F.3d 728 (5th Cir.) (review of conflicts between oral and written judgments and plain error)
- United States v. Weatherton, 567 F.3d 149 (5th Cir.) (plain-error review for unobjected special conditions)
- United States v. Caravayo, 809 F.3d 269 (5th Cir.) (relationship between special conditions and § 3553(a) sentencing goals)