United States v. Roderique (Shannon)
22-2996 23-6050
2d Cir.May 16, 2024Background
- Robert Shannon was convicted by a jury in the Southern District of New York of conspiracy to distribute at least 400 grams of fentanyl and 100 grams of heroin, as well as using a firearm in furtherance of that drug trafficking crime.
- The offenses stemmed from his participation in a large-scale drug operation based out of a stash house in East Orange, New Jersey.
- Evidence against Shannon included testimony from a cooperating witness (Johnson), surveillance videos, drugs and firearms seized from the stash house, and physical evidence connecting him to the drugs.
- Shannon was sentenced to a total of 260 months in prison, including a career offender enhancement under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.
- On appeal, Shannon challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, the calculation of drug quantities at sentencing, and the application of the career offender enhancement based on his prior New Jersey drug convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Shannon's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for drug conspiracy (Count 1) | Evidence insufficient to show he conspired to distribute requisite quantities | Extensive evidence tied him to distribution of sufficient drug quantities | Sufficient evidence; conviction affirmed |
| Sufficiency of evidence for firearm offense (Count 2) | Guns were not possessed in furtherance of drug crimes, merely stored temporarily | Guns were accessible to protect drugs/proceeds in stash house | Sufficient evidence supported jury's nexus finding |
| Drug quantity calculation at sentencing | Court failed to individualize assessment of drugs attributable to him | Sentencing evidence supported quantities linked reasonably to Shannon | No clear error in drug quantity attributable to Shannon |
| Career offender enhancement | NJ law broader than federal law; conspiracy convictions not proper predicates | No plain error; prior convictions valid under controlling law | No plain error; career offender status properly applied |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Requena, 980 F.3d 30 (2d Cir. 2020) (sufficiency of evidence standard of review)
- United States v. Connolly, 24 F.4th 821 (2d Cir. 2022) (heavy burden for sufficiency challenges)
- United States v. Silver, 864 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2017) (standard for affirming jury verdicts)
- United States v. Johnson, 633 F.3d 116 (2d Cir. 2011) (conspiracy participant responsible for foreseeable acts)
- United States v. Lewter, 402 F.3d 319 (2d Cir. 2005) (nexus between firearm and drug offense)
- United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2008) (abuse-of-discretion review for sentencing)
- United States v. Tabb, 949 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2020) (conspiracy can be a career offender predicate)