United States v. Spagnola, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 1178

Indictment charged Spagnola and his brother with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 5 kg+ cocaine and attempted possession with intent to distribute 5 kg+ cocaine; additional firearm offenses under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and § 922(g)(1).
ATF sting operation used a government informant who recorded conversations with George and Spagnola and the courier/agent, producing principal evidence at trial.
George recruited Spagnola; Spagnola agreed to participate and sought to bring armed accompaniments; several meetings with informant, George, and courier occurred to plan the robbbery.
Spagnola was armed when the informant picked him up on the day of the planned robbery; George later indicated others would participate, and George was arrested the day after the operation.
At trial, the government introduced the recorded conversations, George’s post-arrest statement, and Spagnola testified in his own defense; the jury convicted on all counts.
At sentencing, the district court applied a § 3C1.1 perjury enhancement and imposed a 5-year consecutive sentence on § 924(c) despite Spagnola’s contention about the “except clause”; total sentence was 276 months.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy	Government showed agreement and knowledge by George’s recruitment and repeated discussions.	No definite plan or joint action between Spagnola and George; no single meeting.	Sufficient evidence of conspiracy; multiple interactions and shared objective supported conspiracy.
Severance	Joint trial appropriate given joint conspiracy and common plan.	Prejudicial statements (Bruton issues) and non-testifying co-defendant statements require severance.	No abuse of discretion; Bruton issue forfeited and statements admissible; prejudice not shown.
§ 3C1.1 perjury enhancement	District court properly found falsity, willfulness, and materiality of perjury.	Perjury inference not justified by testimonial conduct; not all testimony equates to perjury.	No clear error; enhancement affirmed.
Consecutive § 924(c) sentence despite higher drug-minimum	§ 924(c) consecutive sentence appropriate under Abbott and Easter despite 10-year drug minimum.	§ 924(c) except clause should preclude stacking when higher minimum exists.	Consecutive 5-year sentence proper under the except clause; no greater minimum for firearm conduct.

Lupton v. United States, 620 F.3d 790 (7th Cir.2010) (sufficiency standard: view evidence in light most favorable to government)
Corson v. United States, 579 F.3d 804 (7th Cir.2009) (reaffirming standard for sufficiency of evidence)
Farris v. United States, 532 F.3d 615 (7th Cir.2009) (standard for reviewing credibility and sufficiency)
Haynes v. United States, 582 F.3d 686 (7th Cir.2009) (conspiracy may exist without perfect coordination)
Katalinich v. United States, 113 F.3d 1475 (7th Cir.1997) (need only awareness of common purpose and willing participation)
Dumeisi v. United States, 424 F.3d 566 (7th Cir.2005) (conspiracy cannot be between a defendant and a government agent)
Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (1968) (co-defendant confession implicating another must be limited or severed)
Richardson v. Marsh, 481 U.S. 200 (1987) (limitations on the Bruton doctrine in joint trials)
Emerson v. United States, 501 F.3d 804 (7th Cir.2007) (harmless error analysis for evidentiary issues)
Brimley v. United States, 148 F.3d 819 (7th Cir.1998) (perjury-enhancement considerations)
Easter v. United States, 553 F.3d 519 (7th Cir.2009) (rejection of stacking theory for § 924(c))
Abbott v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 18 (2010) (§ 924(c) consecutive sentences and except clause clarified)
Whitley v. United States, 529 F.3d 150 (2d Cir.2008) (debated construction of the except clause)