*1
STATE Maine
Lucien WOO.
Supreme Judidal Court of Maine.
Argued: Oct.
Decided: Dec. Adams, Atty., T.
Neale Dist. Todd R. Collins, Caribou, Atty. (orally), Asst. Dist. for the State. (orally),
Verne Paradie Trafton & Mat- zen, Auburn, for defendant. SAUFLEY, C.J.,
Panel: CLIFFORD, LEVY, ALEXANDER, SILVER, MEAD, GORMAN, JJ. Majority: SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, LEVY, MEAD, and GORMAN, JJ. SILVER,
Dissent: ALEXANDER and JJ.
GORMAN, J. appeals Lucien conviction (Aroostook Superior entered Court J.) Hunter, County, for unlawful traffick- (Class B), drugs 1103(1-A)(A) (2006), following Although trial. Woo raises several appeal, only issues on we his con- address tention that the evidence sufficient *2 14 here that the evi- argues guilty [¶4] We Woo jury’s verdict.1
to presented at trial was not sufficient dence judgment. affirm the beyond to a reasonable doubt that prove unlawfully trafficked in scheduled I. BACKGROUND he argues Woo that the drugs. Specifically, 9, 2005, was September On any produce to evidence that State failed of unlawful traffick- indicted on one count methamphet- he manufactured (Class B), drugs 17-A ing in scheduled any on or drug amine or other scheduled 1103(1-A)(A), jury aby grand M.R.S. 31, 2005, required by May about as 31, May found that or about “[o]n 1103(1-A), and failed to 2005, intentionally or ... Luden didWoo possessed ingredi- all of the that he even he knew or knowingly traffick what necessary to make ents was drug, to a scheduled which believed be Methamphetamine, schedule W fact reviewing chal 5] When [¶ drug.” evidence, sufficiency of the lenges April On or about light in the most we review the evidence count of unlawful was arrested on a second to determine wheth favorable to State trafficking in and one drugs rationally find er a fact-finder could be of release. violating count of condition every element of yond a reasonable doubt Jury for trial on the first indict- selection Ullring, charged. the offense May 8, was ment occurred on 2006. Woo 1065, 183, ¶ 28, ME 741 A.2d 1999 charge unlawful indicted on the second no less con evidence is “[C]ircumstantial 12, drugs trafficking May in scheduled on in supporting than clusive direct three-day respect trial 2006. Woo’s with Kenney, State v. conviction.” [criminal] 16, began May first indictment on (Me.1987). 681, “A convic 534 A.2d charge of the 2006. Woo was convicted evi may tion on circumstantial be based B in scheduled Class unlawful dence, if such inferences made from even 2006, and, drugs July he was sen- parts of the evidence are contradicted for that At same tenced conviction. Barnard, direct evidence.” State time, guilty to the second pleaded ¶80, 11, (quotation ME 772 A.2d of unlawful and to charge omitted). marks of release. charge violating condition favorable light in a most years Viewed The court sentenced Woo seven State, have found the to the could drug trafficking charge on the first an as- following request, facts. At years all sus- years, to ten with but two three or four purchased on sociate of Woo’s years probation pended, and three from a farm of iodine drug trafficking, pint-sized bottles charge the second occa- company’s catalog on three appeals supply consecutively. Woo be served spring of 2004 and guilty during him sions the winter jury’s finding from the verdict told his asso- originally had traffick- of 2005. Woo original of unlawful count for animal not, he, challenge ciate that he needed the iodine nor ing. He does could fights, later him that he would one charges. but told plea of on the other two (1) impact argues formation a victim’s statement petition, Woo also that: 1. In his Woo; (4) constitutionally sentencing the court insuffi- when the indictment allowing cient; (2) discretion in a State's discretion in abused its abused its court venue; during use an illustrative aid testi- change witness to denying Woo's motion (3) mony. lack merit. These contentions improperly on factual in- court relied day explain the real reason bag, he needed 2005. In the MDEA investi- iodine. eight gators following: found the coffee them; pH filters with residue first shipment 7] The was delivered *3 strips; plates from several hundred striker business, place of Woo’s Caribou Metal phosphorous scraped matches the with red (a Fabricating Hydraulics welding and off; thirty-four packs and empty blister business), associate, and the second to the medicine; twenty-one empty of cold boxes who then forwarded all but one bottle to fuel; empty two containers Coleman six- Woo. Drug The Maine Enforcement dry gas; teen bottles Heet one bottle (MDEA) Agency ship- learned of these tanks; water remover for a re- store just ments and contacted the associate be- for en- ceipt gloves; coffee filters an delivery fore the third in the spring velope which upon grams was written “35 investigation 2005. MDEA’s into Woo’s crystals, grams phosphorous, iodine six red began activities in earnest agents after its grams ephedrine”;2 piece pa- and 16 a spoke to Woo’s associate. per that Welding said “LWS and Fabrica- During 8] the [¶ course of the investi- (which tion”; appeared razor blades gation, MDEA received information from scrape phosphorous have been used to two other sources: Woo’s father-in-law glass off striker plates); pump plas- a with and a lieutenant in the Caribou Police it; tic that on tubing had red residue and a Department. In March of Woo’s video children’s cartoons. Lab tests then-wife, Tressa, father, her contacted performed on the coffee filters revealed Donovan, Wayne because she his wanted plates residue consistent from with striker help moving family out of the home. matchbooks. home, When Donovan arrived at Woo’s Tressa him garbage bag showed located May [¶ 11] On a Caribou Police family’s the garbage driveway can in the Department lieutenant had witnessed road; the bag empty included pack- Wal-Mart, man at accompanied by ages medicine, of cold dry gas, and Cole- young girl, buying items that the lieuten- man fuel. None of these items belonged ant for precursors believed the man- to Tressa or to the children residing in the methamphetamine. ufacture of Subse- home, ten-year-old Tressa’s son and Woo’s investigation quent revealed eight-year-old daughter. purchased the individual who the items at Wal-Mart, plastic tubing, included which Although
[¶ Donovan did not then cookware, matches, glass pH strips, items, significance understand the of these medicine, camping fuel. put garbage bag he of items his into put truck and bag garage with trial, During the the State’s wit- disposing the intent of of it. When he explained nesses how to manufacture day, returned to Woo’s home later that methamphetamine in a us- clandestine lab present. Woo was Donovan mentioned the phosphorous “red method.” The garbage Woo, bag but items that, in witnesses testified order to start only responded that Donovan would not manufacturing process, grinds up one it, to worry have about because would powder cold tablets and soaks the in a be out of Donovan’s life. slurry solvent such as Heet. This is then processed, 10] Donovan turned the garbage leaving crusty filtered and of items over to MDEA phos- on about residue. Then one collects the red agent par- An MDEA testified that this is tial are lye of which used after scraped strips, off of hun- both been
phorous has manufacturing process. drug plates, soaks dreds of matchbook striker pours phospho- the red scrapings, MDEA conducted search liquid through rus coffee filters to collect vehicle, and home person, process leaves a rust or the residue. This its During agents those searches color the filter. brown-red bottles of Heet eleven more fifty- garage open in the and an anti-freeze step, next iodine is used At the pound bag porch. of rock salt on crystals to make that are boiled with *4 methamphetamine. found no agents phospho- the red ephedrine mixture and out- In addition to the evidence The of iodine ex- quantity rus. needed above, testimony presented lined the State in the small ceeds the amounts found bot- that, McBreairty. He Brian testified from pharmacies; generally tles sold in local step-by- in late he showed Woo veterinary supply carry larger stores bot- process making methamphetamine step form metham- liquid tles. has a One that, jury The also heard in his basement. of this phetamine completion base at the February Tressa in or March of step. liquid again lye is filtered and This strong in the house she smell awoke remaining methamphet- is added to the and their children. shared with Woo it; strips are pH amine base to neutralize liquid. level of the case, used to check the acid At the close of the State’s camping A like fuel is then added. solvent acquittal, which was de- moved for Woo of this solvent causes the The addition guilty of the The nied. Woo methamphet- liquid separate, and the drugs. in scheduled unlawful essentially In amine oil is removed. process, salt step manufacturing
last of the II. DISCUSSION together and sulfuric acid are mixed person A of unlaw 18] is [¶ through generate is directed drug W in schedule when ful the metham- plastic tubing to transform (1) intentionally knowingly person or form powdered into the phetamine oil (2) in; or person what the knows traffieks Finally, although methamphetamine. (8) which; drug, to be a scheduled believes manufacturing process, necessary to the (4) drug; in fact a and methamphetamine powder is the brown drug. 17-A M.R.S. drug is a schedule W purposes. for aesthetic usually whitened 1103(1-A)(A). in “Trafficking,” as used § making The process create, means, make, case, manu “to this strong chemical odors. typically results 1101(17)(A) facture.” (2006). produce, means “to “Manufacture” testified that agents Two [¶ MDEA or convert propagate, compound, prepare, medicine large empty number by directly indirectly either process, bottles, and the empty and Heet packages of natural ori from substances extraction phospho- of red evidence of the removal by means of chemi independently gin, plates garbage in the from striker rous 1101(4) synthesis.” 17-A M.R.S. cal indi- bag over to them Donovan turned being methamphetamine was cated that notes, correctly As using phosphorous the red manufactured at trial direct evidence garbage con- no Although the method. made, created, or successfully lye, it contain that he did tained evidence No methamphetamine. manufactured pH fuel containers camping methamphetamine or step process, traces of metham- last when the metham- found, phetamine phetamine powdered oil despite searches of is converted car, person, home, methamphetamine. presence pH garage. Woo’s addition, garbage, oil strips empty camping there was no direct link- containers, open bag, and an rock salt lye, ingredient Woo to an essential purchased addition to the other items Woo making of methamphetamine. There possessed, methamphet- indicates also anyone was no evidence that saw Woo manufactured, amine being and is cir- possess make or successfully cumstantial evidence that Woo did, however, 20] The State present completed the manufacture metham- substantial circumstantial evidence that Barnard, phetamine. See 2001 ME methamphetamine, made ¶ 12, (stating A.2d at 857 that direct or including following: a Mend showed evidence, including circumstantial testimo- Woo how to make methamphetamine; ny experience of witness who has based purchasing large quantities was seen *5 familiarity drugs through with the law of ingredients most of the and items nec- enforcement, beyond can establish rea- essary for making methamphetamine; identity drugs). sonable doubt the of Be- empty or used ingredients containers of cause there was direct and indirect evi- commonly and items utilized in the manu- dence in the record that Woo had all the or processing facture of methamphet- substances needed to or prepare process amine were found in garbage, Woo’s methamphetamine, jury the could have home, garage, and and the items did reasonably inferred that Woo anyone belong home; to else in the used manufactured methamphetamine. Based coffee in filters found garbage Woo’s test- upon the evidence and reasonable in- positively ed phosphorous; par- evidence, flowing ferences from that tial for methamphetamine and a jury rationally beyond could have found paper imprinted with a name similar to reasonable doubt that unlawfully traf- company’s Woo’s name were in mixed was, fact, in ficked what in a scheduled among the used methamphetamine ingre- drug. dients; and Woo’s wife a strong smelled addition, In the evidence on the smell in the shortly house one occasion supports finding record that the State methamphetamine before ingredients proved that Woo was manufactur- found garbage. Woo’s All of ing methamphetamine “pre- because he evidence, these pieces together, taken pared” “processed” methamphetamine. or would an inference that Woo was 1101(4). § See 17-A M.R.S. Although we producing, preparing, compounding, or upon have not before been called to dis- processing methamphetamine. meaning cuss the of “manufacture” for lye Although was not among statute, purposes drug trafficking found, items the State offered to 1103(1-A), § 17-A M.R.S. other courts pH strips demonstrate that and statutory whose definitions of “manufac- camping fuel containers were produce, ture” include or prepare, process garbage, and open fifty- See, that an State, e.g., have done so. Murrell v. pound bag rock salt was found on his Ga.App. S.E.2d porch. Murrell, fuel Camping pH strips are In the defendant was convicted at commonly lye used after in the next-to-last of manufacturing methamphetamine trial step methamphetamine production. although methamphetamine was found commonly essentially home, Salt is used at and not ingredients his all methamphetamine, all which processing of metham- necessary for the manufacture encompassed in the definition of “man- are at 783. were found. Id. phetamine 1101(4). § The ufacture.” 17-A M.R.S. Georgia denying appeal, Murrell’s require statute does not the State applying a statute with Appeals, Court of be- process completed has been in that nearly to that found language identical case, it In this the evidence applies. fore 1101(4), stated: permit at sufficient to trial was pos- We conclude that when defendant reasonably infer that Woo objects and sub- sesses most of the processing, and therefore preparing or “pro- “prepare” stances needed manufacturing, by the red cess” trier phosphorous technique, a rational entry is: 16-13-21(15)’s fact, applying OCGA Judgment affirmed. manufacture, could broad definition beyond a that the find reasonable doubt SILVER, ALEXANDER, J., with whom “preparing” “process- defendant was J., joins, dissenting. drug.... evidence was ing” [T]he Today respectfully I dissent. [¶24] reasonable infer- sufficient (or if person the Court holds “processing,” “preparation” ences of father-in-law) had some of estranged though even manufacturing, thus of cake, and someone ingredients to bake a that he had evidence does not show *6 a gave person recipe to bake once that or all of the items completed drug cake, baking of can be found then he completed to manufacture the needed cake, bake the although no one saw him drug. cake, ever been and no trace of cake has State, 783-84; Id. at see also Dawson beyond permit not found. Our law does (hold- 742, (Ind.App.2003) 748 786 N.E.2d flimsy on such reasonable doubt conviction pills that, up once an individual crushes evidence. from separate ephedrine to order of Lucien stands convicted [¶ 25] binders, methamphetamine pill felony trafficking B of meth- the Class People v. process begun); manufacture has of 17-A M.R.S. amphetamine violation 813-14, 809, 23 Cal.App.4th 19 Lancellotti (2006). 1103(1-A)(A) sup- The State (1993) (holding that manu- Cal.Rptr.2d 640 out that pointing the conviction ports facturing substance from its a controlled “trafficking” includes the definition definition, chemicals, by does component that drugs as “manufacture” scheduled necessarily prod- the finished not include 1101(4) defined in 17-A M.R.S. term is 636, Brown, uct); Or.App. alleged manufacture The (1991) 878, that, (holding because P.2d according to the indict- drugs, manufacture includes the the definition of ment, May on or about 2005. occurred of a processing production, preparation pro- substance, intended to legislature acknowledges that Court The [¶ 26] of the con- simply possession hibit “not evidence at direct “the State prohibited by the substance created trolled made, created, trial that Woo ultimately means, that will but those acts The methamphetamine.” manufactured sub- in the creation of controlled result trace of acknowledges that no also Court stance”). found in was ever Woo, vehicle, prop- and his case, was evidence searches In this there acknowledges erty. The Court further preparing, producing, that Woo was there was no linking to 6. On or about Woo was lye, ingredient an essential of metham- observed at the Caribou Wal-Mart phetamine. purchasing might some items that be used the manufacture of meth- evidence that the State re- amphetamine plastic including tub- lies on to the conviction for the ing, glass cookware, felony pH strips, Class B is limited to following: matches, medicine, camping 1. Sometime in 2004 gave an individual fuel. for making metham- phetamine. A May 7. 2005 search of Woo’s home February or March on one discovery resulted in an open bag occasion, estranged wife empty dry rock salt and some awoke to what she testified was a bottles. strong smell in they the house then That shared. sum and substance The nature the smell not further described in the evi- State’s evidence used convict Woo of dence. manufacturing in or metham- phetamine. Woo’s, togeth- 3. An The evidence acquaintance was tied on three er testifying occasions in late 2004 with officers early as how the 2005, purchased several Woo, bottles of items that the evidence showed that iodine from a farm supply catalog estranged father-in-law, or his had at one and turned them over to Woo. possessed time could be combined with In March two other months before items found make metham- allegedly occurred, phetamine. Woo’s estranged father-in-law took a reasoning [¶29] The this contained, trash among oth- seriously conviction is flawed. As the things, empty er packages of cold *7 note, reader will all of the items at issue medicine, dry gas, and Coleman fuel are ones can be purchased publicly that at from Woo’s home to his home. places such as Wal-Mart and are common- 5. The estranged father-in-law turned ly found in and around rural Maine homes the trash bag over to law enforce- winter, in particularly the those that heat ment May 27, 2005, about sev- with wood. At the of long end Maine days eral before al- trafficking open bag salt, winter an of rock legedly occurred. After in being dry matches, blades, gas, bottles razor estranged possession father-in-law’s medicine, fuel, and Coleman and even months, for more than two cartoon, a video of a children’s are items was found significant to contain a that certainly one would find in thousands of empty
number packages of cold of Maine The quantities may homes. be a medicine, dry gas, gas tank water little than commonly different would be remover, fuel, Coleman coffee filters an individual home. But hasWoo residue, with a red pH strips, a charged not been convicted of manu- large number of matches with the particular facture of a volume metham- phosphorous off, scraped razor phetamine. He blades, has been convicted of tube, pump plastic manufacturing he, it because or his es- a video a children’s cartoon and a father-in-law, partial, complete, tranged but not recipe possessed for most of methamphetamine. the ingredients. “prove not that evidence does ingredients the State’s Possession some constituting crime done.” pro- the acts were might to manufacture
that be used more, substance, Beyond suspicion” is not “mere the State’s evi- without hibited dence, best, proves at one time or support conviction of manufac- at that enough Woo, If the or his estranged substance. law father-in- ture of that another some, all, otherwise, law, holds it to be the Court not of the possessed and as but today, rural Mainers and many then in the manufacture metham- items used prod- that sell these managers key ingredient, of stores Evidence of phetamine. ucts, Further, of manufacture of might be convicted State lacking. lye, was many Maine methamphetamine. had, And of the that or was aware proved might farmers be convicted making methamphetamine. explosives in or manufacture of based plus recipe, plus ingredients, of the Some ni- gasoline and some possession their enough. not As the State suspicion, is trogen-based fertilizers that can be the concedes, that it evidence manufacturing ingredients for ex- primary any methamphet- possessed ever is not so harsh. plosives. Maine law traf- related to the amine any is charge. Nor there ficking Tai, 629 A.2d State manu- steps toward the any that took (Me.1993), “two distinct we described the facture of must prove that propositions” a crime. stat convict an individual of We Interestingly, the State’s evi- ed: not a conviction for could dence First, prove must that the acts the State manufacturing attempted were done. Sec- constituting the crime methamphetamine pursuant ond, the defen- State must To secure a convic- in the criminal acts. dant’s involvement prove, attempt, the State must tion for involve- suspicion of defendant’s Mere doubt, intent both the beyond a reasonable of a crime does ment the commission crime and de- particular to commit a supply evidence sufficient step” taking a to- fendant’s “substantial a conviction. committing that crime. State ward (Me.1990). Id. A Long, A.2d 765-66 “any step” is conduct “substantial observes, agree, and I The Court preparation beyond mere goes sufficiency reviewing *8 firmness of strongly corroborative conviction, we support evidence complete intent to commis- the actor’s light must consider the evidence 152(1) the crime.” 17-A M.R.S. sion of and we must most favorable to State added). (emphasis weight to both circumstantial give equal evidence. See State evidence and direct Here, to traf- of intent ¶¶ 10-11, Barnard, 80, A.2d 2001 ME lacking, completely is fic or manufacture Judging propositions 857. step be- and the evidence of substantial indicates must be opinion Tai our in manu- ing taken toward demonstrates those standards proved completely facture of insufficiency of the evidence best, State has shown lacking. At this conviction. or traf- to manufacture preparation some us that tells attempt But the statute fic. noted that “the In Tai we a crime is commit constituting preparation” “mere must that the acts conviction enough at 595. Here 629 A.2d crime were done.” committing a for attempting crime even
to commit a crime.3
[¶ 36] What the State has is pos- here
session some of the goods used in manu-
facture, a recipe, suspicion” and “mere may
that Woo have manufactured meth-
amphetamine. Tai tells us that is not I
enough. would vacate the conviction.
STATE Maine
Donald WATTS III.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
Submitted on Briefs: Nov.
Decided: Dec. *9 conspiracy theory Absent a not at issue here. See 17-AM.R.S.