Background

• Nunez was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 and related offenses, and sentenced to 85 months.
• He appeals, arguing the evidence supports acquittal on the conspiracy count or, alternatively, a new trial due to weight of the evidence.
• The government charged conspiracy in addition to distribution, aiming to leverage broader quantity for sentencing and to circumvent limitations of proving every sale.
• Nunez bought nearly two kilograms of cocaine from Latine over 18 months; several sales were on credit and returns for quality issues occurred.
• Latine’s wholesale supplier was Nunez’s father; after a quarrel, Latine became the indirect supplier through the father, linking the two families.
• The court affirms the conspiracy conviction, rejecting the claim that the relationship was merely buyer-seller and finding evidence of conspiratorial behavior, including the family linkage and the Latine arrest incident.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• United States v. Colon, 549 F.3d 565 (7th Cir.2008) (distinguishing sale from conspiracy guidance)
• United States v. Lechuga, 994 F.2d 346 (7th Cir.1993) (en banc; relationship concepts in drug offenses)
• United States v. Easter, 553 F.3d 519 (7th Cir.2009) (aggregation for statutory minimums in conspiracy contexts)
• United States v. Rea, 621 F.3d 595 (7th Cir.2010) (conspiracy admissions and party-opponent evidence)
• United States v. Vallar, 635 F.3d 271 (7th Cir.2011) (relational/conspiracy framework in drug cases)
• United States v. Johnson, 592 F.3d 749 (7th Cir.2010) (distinguishing conspiracy from sale under certain tests)
• United States v. Townsend, 924 F.2d 1385 (7th Cir.1991) (line between contract and conspiracy in drug cases)
• United States v. Shabani, 513 U.S. 10 (1994) (conspiracy proof principles; no overt act required)