United States v. Ramon Daniels
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14453
| 5th Cir. | 2013Background
- FBI investigated a Dallas–Shreveport cocaine distribution network (Oct 2009–July 2010); CI made controlled buys from Pugh and wiretaps/pole camera surveillance tracked movements and calls.
- JeCarlos Carter alleged leader in Dallas who obtained cocaine from Thomas Mejorado; Auburn Thomas transported shipments to Shreveport; deliveries were distributed by/coordinated with defendants Pugh, Furlow, Mims, Tenisha Carter, Daniels, and others.
- Law enforcement seized 784.5 g from Pugh’s residence and introduced 750.8 g from twelve controlled buys (total physical seizures introduced at trial = 1.535 kg).
- A superseding indictment charged all six defendants with conspiracy to distribute five kilograms or more of powder cocaine (21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(ii), and 846) and various substantive counts and § 843(b) communications counts.
- Jury convicted all defendants on all counts, including the five-kilogram conspiracy allegation; defendants stipulated to five kilograms for sentencing purposes only and reserved appellate challenges to quantity; district court sentenced several defendants to mandatory-minimum enhanced terms based on the five-kilogram finding.
- On appeal the Fifth Circuit affirmed convictions but held the evidence insufficient to prove the five-kilogram quantity alleged for the conspiracy; vacated and remanded for resentencing under the 500+ gram tier and vacated Daniels’s Count 8 sentence for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that the conspiracy involved ≥5 kg of cocaine | Government: seized + other transactions, and jury may infer many undocumented deliveries ("tip of the iceberg") | Defendants: physical seizures totaled ~1.535 kg; government’s inferences (e.g., "½ kg per delivery") unsupported by record | Court: Evidence insufficient to prove ≥5 kg beyond a reasonable doubt; conviction stands but quantity finding vacated for resentencing under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(ii) (≥500 g) |
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy (general element) | Gov: wiretaps, surveillance, intercepted calls, witness (Pugh) link defendants to agreement | Defendants: challenge participation/connection (esp. Daniels) | Court: Sufficient evidence of an agreement and voluntary participation; conspiracy convictions affirmed |
| Sufficiency of evidence for various substantive counts (possession/intent; 500 g thresholds) | Gov: witness testimony, surveillance, intercepted calls substantiate possession/intent and, where alleged, quantities | Defendants: challenge actual possession or quantity on specific dates (e.g., Thomas, JeCarlos, Furlow, Mims) | Court: Jury reasonably could credit prosecution evidence; substantive convictions affirmed (quantity disputes resolved by crediting witness testimony) |
| Admissibility of business records under Fed. R. Evid. 902(11) (timeliness of attestations) | Gov: provided attestations mid-trial and gave 3 days’ practical notice; district court offered remedies | Defendants: late written notice violated rule and hampered ability to challenge declarants | Held: District court did not abuse discretion admitting records; three days was not an abuse given offered remedies and defendants’ failure to seek them |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for appellate review of sufficiency of evidence)
- United States v. Doggett, 230 F.3d 160 (Apprendi requirement that quantity triggering enhanced penalties be alleged and proved beyond a reasonable doubt)
- United States v. Turner, 319 F.3d 716 (distinguishing conspiracy elements from quantity for sentencing purposes)
- United States v. Hayes, 342 F.3d 385 (conspiracy conviction upheld where quantity alleged was not proved; remand for resentencing at lower statutory tier)
- United States v. Toliver, 351 F.3d 423 (discusses "functional equivalent" of element for quantity/type and sentencing consequences)
- United States v. Collins, 415 F.3d 304 (conspiracy guilt independent of quantity proof; remedy is resentencing, not acquittal)
- United States v. Olguin, 643 F.3d 384 (Rule 902(11) notice: five days’ notice held adequate; discretion on timeliness)
- United States v. Brown, 553 F.3d 768 (discussing timeliness and foundation issues for Rule 902(11) affidavits)