Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03359/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03359-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Frederick Dodd
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Southern District of Iowa. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

________________

No. 05-3359

________________

United States of America,

Appellee,

v.

Frederick Dodd,

Appellant.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Appeal from the United States

District Court for the

Southern District of Iowa.

[UNPUBLISHED]

________________

Submitted: December 22, 2006

 Filed: January 4, 2007

________________

Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges. 

________________

PER CURIAM.

Frederick Dodd appeals his convictions for several drug-trafficking offenses.

The district court1

 entered judgment upon the verdicts and sentenced Dodd to life

imprisonment. While Dodd's original appeal was pending, the Supreme Court decided

United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), rendering advisory the sentencing

range calculated under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG), and we

remanded for resentencing without addressing the merits of the appeal. United States

Appellate Case: 05-3359 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/04/2007 Entry ID: 3264636
-2-

v. Dodd, No. 04-3760 (8th Cir. Order Mar. 18, 2005). On remand, the district court

adopted the Guidelines sentencing calculations from the first sentencing hearing,

denied Dodd's motion for a downward departure on the basis of his medical condition,

and imposed a sentence of 360 months of imprisonment. Mr. Dodd appeals. 

Mr. Dodd argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions

for drug possession, distribution and conspiracy. See United States v. Scofield, 433

F.3d 580, 585-86 (8th Cir.) (discussing evidence sufficient to sustain a conviction for

possession with intent to distribute), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2905 (2006); United

States v. Vinton, 429 F.3d 811, 815 (8th Cir. 2005) (setting forth the elements

necessary to sustain a conspiracy conviction). "We review challenges to the

sufficiency of the evidence by examining the evidence in the light most favorable to

the verdict and accepting as true all reasonable inferences which tend to support the

jury's verdict." United States v. Brown, 461 F.3d 1062, 1069 (8th Cir. 2006). 

Specifically, Dodd asserts that the witnesses against him were not credible

because they were drug addicts or testified in an attempt to receive a lighter sentence.

However, we do not weigh the evidence or assess the credibility of the witnesses on

appeal. United States v. Spears, Nos. 05-4468/06-1354, 2006 WL 3488734, at *2 (8th

Cir. Dec. 5, 2006) (en banc) ("Sufficiency challenges based solely on the credibility

of the witnesses rarely, if ever, prevail."); United States v. Tabor, 439 F.3d 826, 829-

30 (8th Cir.) (crediting the witness's testimony in light of the circumstances is within

the province of the jury), petition for cert. filed, www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/06-

5244.htm (U.S. May 31, 2006) (No. 06-5244). Numerous witnesses testified to

Dodd's leadership and involvement in the possession and distribution of drugs. They

testified that Dodd obtained cocaine from Chicago, brought it to Iowa, cooked large

amounts into crack, packaged it for distribution, and either sold it or supplied it

directly to these witnesses to sell. They also testified that Dodd possessed a gun and

large amounts of cash. Direct and cross-examination revealed to the jury that the

witnesses had been drug users or distributers and that many were testifying in an

Appellate Case: 05-3359 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/04/2007 Entry ID: 3264636
-3-

attempt to obtain potentially reduced sentences. The jury was free to evaluate all of

these circumstances, and viewing the testimony in the light most favorable to the

guilty verdicts, the evidence was more than sufficient for a reasonable jury to find Mr.

Dodd guilty of each offense. 

Mr. Dodd asserts that the testimony of the law enforcement officials was not

reliable because it did not specifically connect him to the evidence, but we conclude

that the evidentiary link was sufficient. Using a confidential informant, Debra

Cunningham, law enforcement conducted four controlled buys of crack from Dodd.

On the basis of an informant's tip, law enforcement officers obtained a search warrant

for the residence at 4427 Brady Street in Davenport and for the vehicle driven by

Dodd. After observing Dodd enter the residence with a key and later leave in the

vehicle, law enforcement officers stopped the vehicle to execute the search. Dodd was

the driver, he had a key to the Brady Street residence, and the search of the vehicle

produced seven packages of crack on the floor of the front passenger seat. The search

of the residence produced 15 separate packages of crack, each containing between

3.08 and 3.38 grams of crack; a bag containing 53.43 grams of powder cocaine; a

pistol; and ammunition. Additionally, they found a receipt to Dodd for renting the

residence. Again, this court "defer[s] to the jury on issues of witness credibility,

especially where there is corroborating physical evidence of the defendant's

involvement." United States v. Watler, 461 F.3d 1005, 1010 (8th Cir. 2006). The jury

was free to reasonably rely upon this evidence, as well as the other testimony, linking

Mr. Dodd to drug trafficking activities. Vinton, 429 F.3d at 815 (noting that in

reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, this court "will reverse only if the jury must

have had a reasonable doubt about an essential element of the crime"). 

Mr. Dodd also challenges the enhancements to his base offense level. We

review the district court's application of the Guidelines de novo and review for clear

error its underlying factual findings. United States v. Scott, 448 F.3d 1040, 1043 (8th

Cir. 2006). Under the advisory Guidelines scheme, the district court need only find

Appellate Case: 05-3359 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/04/2007 Entry ID: 3264636
-4-

sentencing-enhancing facts by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. (citing United

States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543, 551 n.4 (8th Cir.) (en banc)). 

Dodd's sentencing arguments amount to nothing more than a renewed attempt

to attack the credibility of the witnesses. He argues that the witnesses who testified

concerning his possession of a gun and his role in the offense were unreliable drug

addicts with faulty memories. We will not reassess the witnesses' credibility. The

sentencing judge "is free to believe all, some, or none of [a] witness's testimony,"

United States v. Guel-Contreras, 468 F.3d 517, 522 (8th Cir. 2006) (internal marks

omitted), and this court defers to the jury's and sentencing judge's credibility

determinations, United States v. Quintana, 340 F.3d 700, 702 (8th Cir. 2003). 

The record demonstrates that several witnesses testified to Dodd's possession

of a firearm and drugs, and the police recovered a firearm, crack, and cocaine all from

the Brady Street residence. The Government need not prove that a firearm was loaded

and ready for use, but need only show a connection between the gun and the drug

activity in order to apply this enhancement. See United States v. Frazier, 280 F.3d

835, 853 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 536 U.S. 931 (2002). The district court did not

clearly err by applying the enhancement for the possession of a firearm, see USSG

§ 2D1.1(b)(1). See United States v. Villareal-Amarillas, 454 F.3d 925, 931-32 (8th

Cir.) (affirming a two-level enhancement for the possession of a firearm where

testimony indicated the defendant possessed a gun, and multiple pistols were

discovered in the defendant's residence), petition for cert. filed,

www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/06-7772.htm (U.S. Nov. 13, 2006) (No. 06-7772).

Likewise, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in applying the

four-level enhancement for Dodd's aggravating role in the offense. The evidence

clearly supports a finding that Dodd was a leader of a criminal activity involving more

than five participants and that he actively enlisted the aid of others in the criminal

Appellate Case: 05-3359 Page: 4 Date Filed: 01/04/2007 Entry ID: 3264636
-5-

conduct. See USSG § 3B1.1(a); see also United States v. Bahena, 223 F.3d 797, 804-

05 (8th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1181 (2001). 

The district court applied the obstruction of justice enhancement after finding

that Mr. Dodd lied on the witness stand by proclaiming he was not involved in any

drug activity. Dodd asserts that the witnesses at trial lied, not him. 

A district court applying the USSG § 3C1.1 obstruction of justice

enhancement for perjury must review the evidence and make a finding,

by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant gave false

testimony concerning a material matter with the willful intent to provide

false testimony, rather than as a result of confusion, mistake, or faulty

memory.

Guel-Contreras, 468 F.3d at 522 (internal marks and footnote omitted). We find no

clear error in the district court's determination that it was Frederick Dodd, not the host

of other witnesses, who committed perjury. See id. (standard of review); see also

United States v. Moore, 242 F.3d 1080, 1081 (8th Cir. 2001) ("When the factual

findings by the trial court are based on the credibility of witnesses, they are virtually

unreviewable." (internal marks omitted)).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We summarily deny

Mr. Dodd's pro se "Motion for Leave of Court for Permission to Supplement the

Appellate Court Record in Light of Newly Discovered Evidence Under Rule 33 of the

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure," because he is represented by counsel. See

United States v. Saunders, 957 F.2d 1488, 1495 (8th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S.

889 (1992), and 506 U.S. 1058 (1993). 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3359 Page: 5 Date Filed: 01/04/2007 Entry ID: 3264636