Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-08-03525/USCOURTS-ca8-08-03525-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lance Cockrell
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-3525

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Missouri.

*

Lance Cockrell, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 20, 2010

Filed: January 25, 2010

___________

Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lance Cockrell appeals from the judgment of the District Court1

 entered on a

jury verdict finding him guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute

cocaine and cocaine base. The court sentenced Cockrell to 120 months in prison and

five years of supervised release. On appeal, Cockrell’s counsel has filed a brief under

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the sufficiency of the evidence

to support the jury’s verdict. Following careful de novo review, we affirm. See

United States v. Williams, 534 F.3d 980, 985 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review).

Appellate Case: 08-3525 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/25/2010 Entry ID: 3627279
-2-

The evidence at trial included the testimony of Drug Enforcement

Administration agents who conducted surveillance, monitored telephone

conversations, interpreted those conversations, and interviewed Cockrell after

executing a search warrant at his residence. The agent who conducted the interview

testified that Cockrell admitted that he permitted his residence to be used as a “stash

house” for the drugs and that Cockrell acknowledged brokering drug transactions for

others. We conclude that the evidence in this case was legally sufficient to support

the conviction. See id. (noting that to convict on charge of conspiracy, government

must prove, by direct or circumstantial evidence, existence of agreement to distribute

illegal drugs and that defendant knew of conspiracy and intentionally joined it);

United States v. Nunez, 257 F.3d 758, 763–64 (8th Cir. 2001) (affirming conviction

based on evidence that supported government’s theory that defendant’s role in drug

conspiracy included maintaining stash house and collecting proceeds from drug sales

carried out by coconspirator).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. We affirm the judgment of the

District Court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, provided that counsel inform

Cockrell about the procedures for filing pro se petitions for rehearing and for

certiorari. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 08-3525 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/25/2010 Entry ID: 3627279