United States v. Stevenson
656 F.3d 747
7th Cir.2011Background
- DEA investigated a crack and cocaine distribution ring operating out of St. Louis, Missouri, resulting in a fourth superseding indictment charging Gary Stevenson with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute crack and cocaine.
- Co-defendants were added over the superseding indictments; most pled guilty, while Stevenson proceeded to trial in the Southern District of Illinois.
- At trial, government witnesses testified Stevenson sold large quantities of crack and powder cocaine, fronted drugs to customers, and employed couriers and a trail-car driver for drug shipments.
- Stevenson engaged in marijuana distribution with the drug operation; trial evidence showed couriers carrying marijuana and that Stevenson used disguises and layovers to move drugs.
- DEA surveillance and a high-speed chase occurred when agents attempted to arrest Stevenson; he evaded capture and taunted agents afterward.
- Evidence recovered at a later search of a co-conspirator's home included cocaine and crack, corroborating the conspiracy and Stevenson’s role in cooking and selling drugs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether marijuana evidence was admissible under Rule 404(b). | Stevenson argues marijuana use/distribution are bad-acts evidence. | Stevenson contends such evidence was inadmissible under Rule 404(b) (and possibly prejudicial). | Harmless error; evidence did not affect the outcome. |
| Whether the conspiracy conviction was supported or fatallyVariant from the indictment. | Government proves Stevenson conspired with multiple listed co-conspirators. | Evidence insufficient to prove conspiracy with all alleged co-conspirators; variance. | Evidence supports conspiracy to distribute both crack and cocaine; no fatal variance. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ortiz, 474 F.3d 976 (7th Cir. 2007) (harmless-error standard for evidentiary error)
- United States v. Irby, 558 F.3d 651 (7th Cir. 2009) (plain-error review standard for unraised issues)
- United States v. Womack, 496 F.3d 791 (7th Cir. 2007) (conspiracy sufficiency framework for variance challenges)
- United States v. Johnson, 592 F.3d 749 (7th Cir. 2010) (elements of conspiracy; need not prove co-conspirator participation)
- United States v. Townsend, 924 F.2d 1385 (7th Cir. 1991) (government need only prove the defendant joined the agreement alleged)
- United States v. Stott, 245 F.3d 890 (7th Cir. 2001) (conspiracy evidence linking to crack distribution sufficiency)
- United States v. Ochoa, 229 F.3d 631 (7th Cir. 2000) (venue considerations in conspiracy cases )
- United States v. Persico, 425 F.2d 1375 (2d Cir. 1970) (propensity evidence; closely related testimony may not taint credibility)