United States v. Sabranino Thompson
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15318
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- After a jury trial, Thompson was convicted on Counts I–IV (two distributions of cocaine base, one possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, one possession with intent to distribute marijuana) and sentenced to 300 months.
- Two controlled buys occurred June 24–25, 2010 with an informant; recordings and videos showed Thompson receiving $150 for crack cocaine on each occasion, with 1.04 g and 0.99 g respectively.
- A July 2, 2010 search of Easter’s apartment yielded 33.04 g cocaine base, 153 bags of marijuana, and a Timberland bag with Thompson’s fingerprint, indicating possession and potential distribution.
- Thompson’s Cadillac was found registered at Easter’s address; officers arrested him in the apartment after the June 24 transaction; $740 cash was found on his person.
- Easter testified Thompson stayed at the apartment regularly and supplied marijuana in small bags; she had limited knowledge of cocaine/marijuana in the unit and claimed the drugs were not hers.
- The IWDA wage record showed no wages for Thompson in 2009–2010; the government used this, along with cash and other evidence, to argue unexplained wealth and intent to distribute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether jury instruction on intent to distribute was improper | Thompson | Thompson | Instruction proper; not erroneous under Shurn and related standard |
| Admission of IWDA wage record and Confrontation Clause | Thompson | Government | IWDA record non-testimonial; Confrontation Clause not violated |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Counts I–IV | Thompson | Government | Evidence sufficient; supports all four convictions |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Slagg, 651 F.3d 832 (8th Cir. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion review for jury instructions; probable effect on verdict)
- United States v. Faulkner, 636 F.3d 1009 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard for evaluating jury instruction errors)
- United States v. Wisecarver, 644 F.3d 764 (8th Cir. (2011)) (whole-charge fair-and-complete instruction doctrine)
- United States v. Shurn, 849 F.2d 1090 (8th Cir. 1988) (intent to distribute may be inferred from possession of large quantity; multiple factors not required to be present)
- United States v. Mashek, 606 F.3d 922 (8th Cir. 2010) (business records non-testimonial for Confrontation Clause purposes)
- Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (Supreme Court 2009) (business records generally non-testimonial; confrontation concerns limited)
- United States v. Payton, 636 F.3d 1027 (8th Cir. 2011) (elements for distribution convictions; intent inferred from conduct)
- United States v. Sheppard, 219 F.3d 766 (8th Cir. 2000) (knowledge element in distribution cases; sufficiency review framework)
- United States v. Aldridge, 664 F.3d 705 (8th Cir. 2011) (credibility determinations and jury deference)
- United States v. Mashek, 606 F.3d 922 (8th Cir. 2010) (non-testimonial business records under Confrontation Clause)