FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT M ay 31, 2007 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 12731 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 6 0 1 8 9 - C R - P AS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A U D Y F A C E Y , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ay 31, 2007) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d B A R K E T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: F o l l o w i n g a j u ry tri al , A u d y F acey w as co n v i ct ed o f co n sp i racy t o p o ssess2

w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e 100 ki l ogr a m s orm or e of m a r i j ua na , i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U. S . C . § § 8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) a n d 8 4 6 , a n d wa s s e n t e n c e d t o 7 5 m o n th s i n p r i s o n . He ap p e a l s , c h a l l e n g i n g th e s u f f i c i e n c y o f

th e e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i n g h i s c o n v i c t i o n . He a l s o a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n pr ovi di ng the j ury w i th c orr obor a t i ve tr a n s c r ip ts o f

h is r e c o r d e d c o n v e r s a tio n s , w ith o u t p r o p e rs a f e g u a r d s , a n d th a t th is e rr o rc a u s e d h im p r e

ju d ic e . U p o n r e v ie w , w e A F F I R M .

I . B AC KG RO UN D F a c e y ’ s c onvi c t i on a r i s e s outof a c ons pi r a c y t o i m por tappr oxi m a t e l y 600 p o u n d s o f

ma r i j u a n a f r o m J a ma i c a t o th e Un i t e d St a t e s . I n J a n u a ry 2 0 0 4 th e DEA w a s i nf or m e d by R oha n ( “ R on” ) G or da n, a pa i d c onf i de nt i a l i nf

or m a ntope r a t i ng in J a m a ic a , th a t tw o J a m a ic a n s m u g g le r s , P a tr ic k T h o m p s o n a n d D e n to n H a ll, w e r e a tt e m pt i ng t o s m uggl e a l a r ge a m ountof m a r i j ua na i nt o the U ni t e d S t a t e s by bo at . T he D E A i nstruct ed G ordo n t o m ov e f orw ar d w i th the op er at i on , and t o act a s the f a c i l i t a t orbe tw e e n the J a m a i c a n s m uggl e r s a nd the r e c i pi e nt s of the m a r i j ua na he r e i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s . G or don w a s i ns truc t e d t o pr ovi de a boa ta nd a boa tc apt a i n t o the s m uggl e r s . H e w a s a l s o a uthor i z e d by the D E A t o tr a ve l t o the U ni t e d S t a t e s , i n or de rt o l i a i s e w i th the r e c i pi e ntm e m be r s of the tr a f f i c ki ng op er at i on w ho w er e bas ed i n sou th F l ori da. U pon a rr i vi ng i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s , the D E A pr ovi de d G or don w i th a3

r e c or di ng de vi c e , a nd he w a s i ns truc t e d t o r e c or d a l l of hi s t e l e phone c onve r s a t i ons w i th the pu t at i ve tra ff

i cker s i n sou th F l ori da. T he Ja m ai ca n sm ug gl er s had gi ven G ordo n p ho ne nu m bers for tw o con t ac t s i n F l ori da. O ne of these cont ac t s w as L a w t on “ S tur dy ” B l a c kw ood, w ho phone d G or don f r om a T a m pa a r e a c ode a nd a s k e d ab o u t th e m a r iju a n a b e in g s m u g g le d in f r o m J a m a ic a . G o r d o n s u b s e q u e n tly arran g ed t o m eetB l ack w o o d atth e C o ral S q u are sh o p p i n g m al l i n C o ral S p ri n g s, F l or i da , on 3 M a y 2004. T he 3 M a y m e e t i ng w a s r e c or de d, vi a a hi dde n r e c or di ng devi ce on G ordo n’ s per son, and w as al so vi deot aped vi a asurvei l l ance pl at form tha tthe D E A ha d a s s e m bl e d a tthe m a l l . B oth the a udi o a nd the vi de o r e c or di ngs o f th e m e e tin g w e r e la te rs u b m itte d in to e v id e n c e a t tr ia l. I n the m e e t i ng, G or don a rr i ve d a tthe C or a l S pr i ngs M a l l i n a m i ni va n, a nd B l ac kw oo d arr i ved i n a B M W , w i th the appel l ant , F ac ey , se at ed i n the pass enger s e a t . U pon a rr i va l , B l a c kw ood e xi t e d the B M W a nd c onve r s e d w i th G or don i ns i de the m i ni va n f

orappr oxi m a t e l y tw e nty m i nut e s , w hi l e F a c e y r e m a i ne d s e a t e d i n the B M W . T he r e c or di ng of the m e e t i ng, w hi c h w a s s ubs e que nt l y tr a ns c r i be d, de m ons tr a t e s tha tG or don a nd B l a c kw ood di s c us s e d the m a r i j ua na tha tG or don w as se eki ng t o sm ug gl e i nt o F l ori da. B l ac kw oo d st at ed thathe had b ee n adv i se d by hi s J a m a i c a n c ont a c t s tha tG or don ha d s om e “ c he e s e , ” a nd tha tthe J a m a i c a nsGordon, the Jamaican inf ormant, testified at trial that “che ese”ref erred to marijuana . 1 See R4 at 188. Healso testified that the Jamaican de aler s used a number of slangwords–such a s “Reg g ae B oys,” “bush”and “f ish”–to ref

er to marijuana. I d. Clyde Parr y , the DEA of

ficer who ov e rs aw thisinv e sti g atio n, c on firm e d th at dr ugtra ff ic kersfre qu e ntly

sp e ak in c od e d w ords in discussing illicit drug s. Gordon later testified that at the 3 May meetingFacey

had been introduced to him as 2 Blackwood’ s “driver .” See R5 at 35. 4 ha d a s ke d B l a c kw ood w he the rhe c oul d t a ke i t . R 1- 106, E xh. 1 a t7. G or don 1 a s ke d B l a c kw ood “ w ha tki nd of m a r ke t ” he ha d f

ors uc h a pr oduc ta nd B l a c kw ood advi se d thatthe m arketw as very go od . Id. at7. B l ac kw oo d i nq ui re d w hether G o r d o n ’s p r o d u c t w a s “h ig h g r a d e ,” a n d G o r d o n s ta te d th a t it w a s . I d . a t 1 4 . B l ack w o o d st at ed th ath e w as n o tp rep ared t o “ d o an yth i n g t o d ay, ” b u tth ath e j u st w an t ed t o “ see” G o rd o n , t o “ t al k t o [h i m ] , ” an d t o “ l et[h i m ] m eet[B l ack w o o d ’ s] dr i ve r , ” F a c e y . I d. a t15. H e a dvi s e d tha tF a c e y w a s a “ good f r i e nd, ” a nd 2 i ndi c a t e d tha tw he n G or don w a s r e a dy t o m ove f orw a r d w i th the tr a ns a c t i on B l ac kw oo d cou l d i nstructF ac ey t o con t ac thi m and h e w ou l d “ kn ow w hatt o d o. ” I d . a t 1 5 - 1 6 . B la c k w o o d a ls o a s k e d G o r d o n h o w s o o n h e c o u ld h a v e th e p r o d u c t, be c a us e he “ ne e d[ e d] t o m ove i tby ne xtw e e ke nd. ” I d. a t18. A ppr oxi m a t e l y 21 m i nut e s i nt o the m e e t i ng, F a c e y e nt e r e d the m i ni va n a nd j oi ne d G or don a nd B l a c kw ood i n c onve r s a t i on. A f t e ra s hor ti ntr oduc t i on, the conv er sa t i on shi ft ed t o the m ar i j uana. B l ac kw oo d sai d “ [i ] f y ou gi ve m e a co n tain erlo ad o r tru ck lo ad th en I’ll b e r es p o n sib le fo r th at,” an d F ac ey stated : “ I5

w i l l t a ke the gr e e n [ uni nt e l l i gi bl e ] . ” I d. a t29. B l a c kw ood the n r e i t e r a t e d the p u rp o s e o f

th e in tr o d u c tio n : “I b r o u g h t th is m a n h e r e . S o w h e n . . . [ m ]e s e n d h im d o w n h e r e . . . [ y ]o u k n o w e x a c tly w h o y o u a r e g o in g to s e e .” I d . a t 3 5 - 3 6 . B la c k w o o d s ta te d to G o r d o n th a t F a c e y w a s f le x ib le , b e c a u s e h e w a s in th e a r e a . F ac ey as ked G ordo n, “ [w ] hatgo nn a happen w hen [l engt hy un t el l i gi bl e] ? ” I d. at 3 9 - 4 0 . A f

te rB la c k w o o d s u g g e s te d th a t h e w o u ld a w a it G o r d o n ’s g e ttin g b a c k in t ouc h w i th the m , F a c e y e xi t e d the va n a nd l e f tthe m e e t i ng, w hi l e G or don a nd B l a c kw ood r e m a i ne d i n the va n f orf ur the rc onve r s a t i on. I d. a t40- 41. S ub se qu entt o thi s m ee t i ng , B l ac kw oo d p rovi ded G ordo n w i th the fuel m on ey for the bo attri p. O n 1 8 Jun e 200 4, G ordo n tra nspo rt ed by bo at approx i m at el y 668 po un ds of m ar i j uana fr om Ja m ai cat o the U ni t ed S t at es . A ft er doi ng s o, G or don pl a c e d a phone c a l l t o F a c e y on 8 J ul y 2004; thi s c onve r s a t i on w a s a l s o r e c or de d a nd a dm i tt e d i nt o e vi de nc e . I n tha tc onve r s a t i on G or don in d ic a te d th a t h e h a d th e “f is h ” a n d th a t h e w a s g o in g to “f ix it u p n ic e ” p r io rto gi vi ng i tt o F a c e y . R 1- 106, E xh. 2 a t2. G or don i ndi c a t e d tha tthe i t e m w a s goi ng t o be “ s e pa r a t e [ d] ” i nt o “ bi g w hi t e s uga rba gs , ” a nd tha the w a s pl a nni ng on g e ttin g it o u t th e n e x t d a y . I d . I n r e s p o n s e , F a c e y s ta te d : “O k a y . I ’m d e f in ite ly [ goi ng t o] ha ve t o m a ke pr e pa r a t i ons . ” I d. T he y a gr e e d t o c om m uni c a t e the fo l l o w i n g d ay, an d F acey st at ed , “ [j ] u stg i v e m e t i m e t o g o g etth e p ro p er th i n g s,Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. C t. 1602 (1966). 3 6 th e a c c o m m o d a tio n s [ ,] a n d th e n g e t b a c k in to u c h w ith y o u .” I d . a t 3 . T he nextday, the tw o agai n spo ke by ph on e, and F ac ey i nd i ca t ed thathe w as aw ai t i ng w ord o n “ w hatki nd of bi g v an t o g et . ” R 1, D oc. 13 0, G ov . E xh . 13 B at 2. F a c e y s t a t e d tha the a l s o w a nt e d t o a s c e r t a i n f r om G or don “ w ha tt i m e f r a m e [ he w a s ] lo o k in g f

o r ,” a n d G o r d o n in d ic a te d th a t h e w o u ld c a ll T a m p a to f in d o u t. I d . A ft erthi s c on vers at i on , F ac ey re nt ed a c ar go van u nd erthe nam e of R ob ert S c a r l e tt e . T he va n w a s de l i ve r e d t o G or don. O n 13 J ul y 2004, G or don, w i th the a s s i s t a nc e of D E A O f f i c e rP a rry a nd other D E A agent s, l oaded t he van w i th m ar i j uana and d rove i tt o an u nd er cover w a r e hous e . G or don a rr a nge d t o m e e tF a c e y a c r os s the s tr e e t . O nc e G or don arri ved, G ordo n and F ac ey w al ked acros s the stre ett o the w ar ehou se . F ac ey ob se rved the m ar i

j uana i n the van, and w as apparent l y upsetatthe w ay that m ar i j uana had b ee n p ac kaged; F ac ey st at ed, “ [i ] tca n’ tw ork l i ke thi s now . ” R 5 at 38 . G ordo n h ad been i nstruct ed by the D E A t o t el l F ac ey thatthe van k ey s w er e on a s hel f i n the w ar ehou se . W hen F ac ey w entt o l oo k for the keys , he w as arre st ed. A ft erbei ng re ad hi s M i ra nd a ri gh t s, F ac ey w ai ved h i s r i gh t s a nd st at ed 3 t o D E A O f

f i c e rP a rry tha the ha d be e n pl a nni ng on tr a ns por t i ng a va n l oa d of m ar i j uana. S ub se qu ent l y, ho w ever , F ac ey m od i fi ed thatst at em entand i nd i ca t ed7

thathe had o nl y bee n p l anni ng on pi cki ng up and t ra nspo rt i ng a l oad o f f i sh. R 4 at 78- 79. A ft er h i s arrest , F acey w as ch arg ed w i th o n e co u n to f co n sp i racy t o p o ssess w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e 100 ki l ogr a m s orm or e of m a r i j ua na , i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . §§ 841( a ) ( 1) ( B ) a nd 846, a nd one c ountof a tt e m pt e d pos s e s s i on w i th i nt e nt t o d i s tr i b u t e 1 0 0 o rmo r e k i l o g r a ms o f ma r i j u a n a , i n v i o l a t i o n o f

2 1 U . S. C. §§ 84 1(a) (1)( B ) a nd 84 6. A j ury tri al w as hel d i n F ebruary20 06 . T he j ury conv i ct ed F ac ey of the drug conspi ra cy coun t , bu tac qu i tt ed hi m of the att em pt ed po ss es si on coun t . F ac ey then m ov ed, pu rs uantt o R ul e 29(c) of the F eder al R ul es of C ri m i nal P roce du re , for aj ud gm entof ac qu i tt al on the drug conspi ra cy char ge, a r g u in g th a t th e r e w a s in s u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e to s u p p o r t h is c o n v ic tio n o n th a t c o u n t. T he di s tr i c tc our tde ni e d hi s m ot i on, a nd F a c e y w a s s e nt e nc e d t o 75 m onths of i m pri sonm entand fi ve ye ar s of s up ervi se d rel ea se . O n app ea l , F ac ey m akes tw o argum ent s. F i rs t , he cont ends thatthere w as i ns uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e t o s uppor thi s c onvi c t i on on the drug c ons pi r a c y c ount , a nd th a t, th e r e f

o r e , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d in d e n y in g h is R u le 2 9 m o tio n f o ra c q u itta l. S ec on d, he ar gu es thatthe tra nscr i pt s of the re corded conv er sa t i on s thatt oo k p l ac e dur i ng the c our s e of

thi s s m uggl i ng ope r a t i on s houl d notha ve be e n pr ovi de d t o the ju ry w ith o u t a d d itio n a l s a f e g u a r d s , a n d th a t th e c o u r t’s d o in g s o c a u s e d h im8

p r e ju d ic e . W e a d d r e s s e a c h o f th e s e c o n te n tio n s in tu rn . I I . DI S CUS S I ON A . F ac ey ’ s M ot i on F or Judg m entof A cqui tt al /S uffi ci ency of T he E vi dence

“ W e r evi ew the deni al of a def endant ’ s m ot i on for a cqui tt al de no vo . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. P e r e z - T os t a , 36 F . 3d 1552, 1556 ( 11th C i r . 1994) ( c i t a t i ons om i tt e d) . I n c ons i de r i ng the s uf f i c i e nc y of

the e vi de nc e , w e vi e w a l l of the e vi de nc e “ i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the gove rnm e nt , w i th a l l i nf e r e nc e s a nd c r e di bi l i ty c hoi c e s dr a w n i n the gove rnm e nt ’ s f a vor . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. L e C r oy , 441 F . 3d 91 4, 92 4 (11 th C i r. 20 06 ). W e “ ca nn otre vers e aconv i ct i on for i nsuffi ci ency of the e vi de nc e unl e s s . . . w e c onc l ude tha tno r e a s onabl e j ury c oul d f i nd pr oof b e y o n d a r e a s o n ab le d o u b t.” U n ite d S ta te s v . J o n e s , 9 1 3 F .2 d 1 5 5 2 , 1 5 5 7 ( 1 1 th C i r . 1990) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . W e ke e p i n m i nd tha t“ [ i ] ti s notne c e s s a ry tha tthe e v id e n c e e x c lu d e e v e ry r e a s o n ab le h y p o th e s is o f in n o c e n c e o rb e w h o lly i nc ons i s t e ntw i th e ve ry c onc l us i on e xc e ptgui l t , pr ovi de d tha ta r e a s onabl e tr i e rof fa ctcoul d fi nd thatthe evi dence es t abl i shed gu i l tbeyond a r ea sonabl e dou bt . ” U ni t ed S t at es v. H arri s, 20 F . 3d 44 5, 45 2 (11 th C i r. 19 94 ) ( ci t at i on s om i tt ed). A c ons pi r a c y i s “ a n a gr e e m e ntt o c om m i ta n unl a w f ul a c t . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. T ol e r , 144 F . 3d 1423, 1425 ( 11th C i r . 1998) ( c i t a t i on a nd i nt e rna l quot a t i ons om i tt e d) . I n or de rt o s uppor ta c onvi c t i on f ora drug c ons pi r a c y pur s ua ntt o 219

U . S . C . §§ 841 a nd 846, the gove rnm e ntm us tpr ove be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubt : ( 1) thatan i l l egal agre em entexi st ed t o p osse ss w i th the i nt entt o d i stri bu t e i l l egal drugs ; ( 2) tha tthe de f

e nda ntkne w of

the a gr e e m e nt ; a nd ( 3) tha tthe de f e nda nt kn ow i ng l y a nd vo l un t ar i l y j oi ned i n, or part i ci pat ed i n, the agree m ent . U ni t ed S t a t e s v. C ha r l e s , 313 F . 3d 1278, 1284 ( 11th C i r . 2002) ( pe rc ur i a m ) . O nc e the d ru g c o n s p ir a c y h a s b e e n s h o w n to e x is t, “a d e f e n d a n t c a n b e c o n v ic te d e v e n if h is or her part i ci pat i on i n the sc hem e i s ‘ sl i gh t ’ by com pari son t o the ac t i on s of other co-c on spi ra t ors. ” T ol er , 14 4 F . 3d at14 28 . W e have s t at ed, ho w ever , thatm er e pr e s e nc e a tthe s c e ne of the c r i m e w i l l nots uppor ta drug c ons pi r a c y c onvi c t i on; the gove rnm e ntm us te s t abl i s h, by di r e c torc i r c um s t a nt i a l e vi de nc e , the d efen d an t ’ s “ k n o w i n g p art i ci p at i o n ” i n th e co n sp i racy. U n i t ed S t at es v . V i l l eg as, 91 1 F . 2d 62 3, 62 7-28 (11th C i r. 19 90 ). I n th is c a s e , it is u n d is p u te d th a t a c o n s p ir a c y e x is te d to im p o r t ap p r o x im a te ly 64 8 p ou nd s of m ar i

j uana from Ja m ai ca . R ather, F ac ey ’ s app ea l hi ng es on the l att er r e qui r e m e nt s of

a c ons pi r a c y c ha r ge , tha ti s , hi s “ know i ng pa r t i c i pa t i on” i n the c ons pi r a c y . S e e i d. F i r s t , F a c e y c ont e nds tha thi s pr e s e nc e a tthe 3 M a y 2004 m ee t i ng betw ee n B l ac kw oo d and G ordo n– i n w hi ch the tra ff i cki ng op er at i on w as di s c us s e d a tl e ngth–w a s note nough t o pr ove be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubttha the

“ know i ngl y pa r t i c i pa t e d” i n the drug c ons pi r a c y , be c a us e he s a i d ve ry l i tt l e dur i ng10

the m ee t i ng and w as no tpres entfor al ar ge po rt i on of the di sc ussi on . M oreover, F ac ey cont ends thatno ne of the subsequentph on e c al l s betw ee n G ordo n and F ac ey d em o n strat e h i s aw aren ess o f, o r h i s k n o w i n g p art i ci p at i o n i n , th e d ru g co n sp i racy. F a c e y m a i nt a i ns tha the w a s w hol l y una w a r e of the c ont e nt s of

the va n w he n he coordi nat ed the m ee t i ng w i th G ordo n o n 1 3 Jul y, and t hathe tho ug hthe w as tr a n s p o r tin g f

is h in th e r e n te d c a r g o v a n . A c c o r d in g ly , F a c e y c o n te n d s th a t h is R u le 2 9 m o tio n f

o ra c q u itta l s h o u ld h a v e b e e n g r a n te d . W e d is a g r e e . F ir s t, w ith r e s p e c t to th e 3 M a y m e e tin g a t th e s h o p p in g m a ll, e v id e n c e w a s p r e s e n te d th a t te n d e d to e s tab lis h F a c e y ’s k n o w in g p a r tic ip a tio n in the m a r i j ua na s m uggl i ng ope r a t i on. A l though F a c e y w a s notpr e s e ntf orthe ent i re ty of the conv er sa t i on i n the m i ni van, B l ac kw oo d m ade c l ea r a tthe ou t se t th ato n e o f th e p u rp o ses o f th e m eet i n g w as t o “ l etyo u m eetm y d ri v er, ” th ati s, F a c e y , s o tha tw he n G or don w a s r e a dy t o m ove f orw a r d w i th the tr a ns a c t i on B l ac kw oo d cou l d i nstructF ac ey t o con t ac tG ordo n and F ac ey w ou l d “ kn ow w hat to d o .” R 1 - 1 0 6 , E x h .1 a t 1 5 - 1 6 . A f t e rF a c e y e nt e r e d the m i ni va n, the thr e e f ur the rdi s c us s e d the m a r i j ua na thatw as bei ng brou gh ti n from Ja m ai ca , re fe rr i ng t o i tas “ R eggae B oy, ” w hi ch G o r d o n ’s s u b s e q u e n t te s tim o n y e s tab lis h e d w a s a s la n g te r m f o rm a r iju a n a . B l ac kw oo d st at ed–i n F ac ey ’ s pre se nce–thati f G ordo n g ave hi m “ a c on t ai ner l oad11

or truck l oad t hen [B l ac kw oo d w ou l d] be re spon si bl e f or that , ” t o w hi ch F ac ey in te r je c te d : “I w ill ta k e th e g r e e n [ u n in te llig ib le ].” R 1 - 1 0 6 , E x h .1 a t 2 9 . B l ac kw oo d al so re i t er at ed the pu rpose of the i ntrodu ct i on , st at i ng thathe had brou gh tF ac ey t o m ee tG ordo n so thatw hen t he t i m e c am e t o m ov e the m ar i j uana, G ordo n w ou l d “ kn ow exac t l y w ho you are go i ng t o see . ” I d. at35 -36. B ef ore l e a vi ng the m e e t i ng, F a c e y a s ke d G or don w ha tw a s goi ng t o happe n, a nd w he n. T hi s e vi de nc e s ugge s t s tha tF a c e y know i ngl y pa r t i c i pa t e d i n the drug ope r a t i on. A l though he w a s r e t i c e nta tt i m e s dur i ng the di s c us s i on, F a c e y ’ s s t a t e m e nt s a tthe m ee t i ng sugg es tthathe kn ew the pu rpose of the 3 M ay m ee t i ng , and t hathe w as w i l l i n g t o t ak e st ep s t o effectuate i t s p u rp o ses. M oreover, the evi dence of the subsequentph on e c on vers at i on s betw ee n G o rd o n an d F ac ey es tab li sh ed th at F ac ey d iscu ss ed h o w b es t t o tran sp o rt G o rd o n ’s co n trab an d (aft er G o rd o n p ro p o sed sep arat i n g i ti n t o l arg e su g ar b ag s). F acey als o a g r e e d to m a k e a rr a n g e m e n ts to s e c u r e a v a n o f th e ap p r o p r ia te s iz e f

o rG o r d o n . F i nal l y, G ordo n and D E A O ff i ce r P arry bo th t es t i fi ed– and the vi deo survei l l ance t apes confi rm ed–t hatatthe Jul y 13 rendezvou s, w hen t he m ar i j uana-l aden van w as r e a dy , F a c e y a rr i ve d a tthe s c he dul e d t i m e a nd pl a c e , vi e w e d the m a r i j ua na i n the va n, r e a rr a nge d i tt o hi s s a t i s f a c t i on, a nd w a s pr e pa r i ng t o r e tr i e ve the ke y t o the v a n w h e n h e w a s a rr e s te d . T h is e v id e n c e c e r ta in ly c o u ld h a v e le d a r e a s o n ab le12

ju ry to f in d th a t F a c e y k n o w in g ly p a r tic ip a te d in th e p la n to p o s s e s s a n d d is tr ib u te m a r iju a n a . O n appe a l F a c e y a tt e m pt s t o a na l ogi z e hi s c a s e t o ourl i ne of “ i nnoc e nt byst ander” or “ m er e pre se nce” ca se s. In som e of tho se ca se s, w e have re vers ed drug c ons pi r a c y c onvi c t i ons be c a us e the e vi de nc e f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubte i the rtha tthe de f e nda ntkne w tha tdrugs w e r e i nvol ve d i n a pa r t i c ul a rtr a ns a c t i on, s e e C ha r l e s , 313 F . 3d a t1284- 85; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S ul l i va n, 7 6 3 F .2 d 1 2 1 5 , 1 2 1 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 5 ) , o rth a t th e d e f e n d a n t to o k a n y s te p s to p a r tic ip a te in o rto f

u r th e rth e d ru g c o n s p ir a c y . S e e T o le r , 1 4 4 F .3 d a t 1 4 3 3 - 3 4 . W e f i nd, how e ve r , tha tF a c e y ’ s c a s e i s c l os e rt o U ni t e d S t a t e s v. L y ons , 53 F . 3d 1 1 9 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 5 ) . I n L y o n s , th e d e f e n d a n t w a s p r e s e n t a t a n in itia l m e e tin g in w hi c h a n unde r c ove ra ge ntdi s c us s e d pur c ha s i ng c r a c k c oc a i ne f r om a c oc ons pi r a t or ; the r e c or d r e f l e c t e d tha tthe de f

e nda nt“ w a s w e l l a w a r e of the na tur e of the tr a ns a c t i on t a ki ng pl a c e , ” a nd the c o- c ons pi r a t orm a de no e f f or tt o c onc e a l the na tur e of the e xc ha nge f

r om he r . I d. a t1200. S ubs e que ntt o tha tm e e t i ng, the d e f e n d a n t in L y o n s h a d tr a v e le d to th e c r a c k h o u s e w ith h e rc o - c o n s p ir a to rto p r o c u r e th e c r a c k c o c a in e , a n d h a d b e e n p r e s e n t w h e n th e c r a c k c o c a in e w a s s o ld t o the agenton tw o separ at e occ as i on s. Id. at12 00 -01. T he defendantar gu ed that s h e h a d m e r e ly b e e n p r e s e n t; th a t s h e h a d n o t n e g o tia te d ab o u t th e d ru g p r ic e s w ith13

the agent ; and t hatshe had “ cont ri bu t ed no thi ng t o . . . [the] cr i m i nal venture. ” I d . a t 1 2 0 1 . W e di s a gr e e d, a nd a f

f i r m e d he rc onvi c t i on. F i r s t , w e not e d tha tw hi l e the defe nd anthad b ee n p re se nt , and t hat“ m er e pre se nce” w as no tenou gh , pres ence at d ru g tr a f f ic k in g tr a n s a c tio n s “r a is e [ d ] a p e r m is s ib le in f e r e n c e o f p a r tic ip a tio n in the drug c ons pi r a c y . ” I d. a t1201; a c c or d U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M c D ow e l l , 250 F . 3d 13 54 , 13 65 (11th C i r. 20 01 ) ( st at i ng that“ pres ence [] i s aprob at i ve fa ct or w hi ch the j ury m a y c ons i de ri n de t e r m i ni ng w he the ra de f e nda ntw a s a know i ng a nd i nt e nt i ona l pa r t i c i pa nti n a c r i m i na l s c he m e ” ) . S e c ond, w e not e d tha tthe de f e nda nt ha d be e n re

peat edl y pr e s e nta tthe s e c r a c k- de a l i ng tr a ns a c t i ons , a nd tha tthe c oconspi ra t or had m ade no effortt o h i de the drug s f rom her, or t o h i de the fa ctthat s he w a s de a l i ng the m . T hus , w e s t a t e d tha ti t“ s tr a i n[ e d] c r e dul i ty ” tha tthe d e f e n d a n t w a s n o th in g m o r e th a n a h ap le s s b y s ta n d e ro b s e r v in g th e s e tr a n s a c tio n s . L yons at12 03 . In l i gh tof these fa ct s, w e s t at ed thata j ury c ou l d h ave i nferre d “n o t o n ly [ th a t s h e ] k n e w s h e w a s p r e s e n t a t a d ru g d e a l, b u t th a t s h e in te n d e d to c ontr i but e t o the c ons pi r a t or i a l obj e c t i ve . ” I d. a t1202; s e e a l s o U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C ruz - V a l de z , 773 F . 2d 1541, 1546 ( 11th C i r . 1985) ( e n ba nc ) ( “ A j ury m a y f i nd kn ow l edgeabl e, vo l un t ary part i ci pat i on fr om pres ence w hen t he pres ence i s s uch th a t it w o u ld b e u n r e a s o n ab le f o ra n y o n e o th e rth a n a k n o w le d g e ab le p a r tic ip a n t to14

be pres ent . ”) . S im ila r ly , h e r e w e f

in d th a t F a c e y ’s r e lia n c e o n th e “m e r e p r e s e n c e ” c a s e s is m i spl ac ed. A s i n L yons, F ac ey w as no tj ustpres entatthe 3 M ay m ee t i ng betw ee n B l a c kw ood a nd G or don, butw a s “ pr e s e n[ t ] unde ra pa r t i c ul a rs e tof c i r c um s t a nc e s , ” tha ti s , a l e ngthy di s c us s i on aboutpur c ha s i ng G or don’ s m a r i j ua na s h ip m e n t. S e e L y o n s , 5 3 F .3 d a t 1 2 0 1 ( q u o tin g C ru z - V a ld e z , 7 7 3 F .2 d a t 1 5 4 6 ) . In ad d i t i o n , as i n L yo n s, F acey w as re peat edl y pres entas the conspi ra cy m ov ed f o rw a r d

– c o o r d in a tin g w ith G o r d o n n o t ju s t a t th e 3 M a y m e e tin g b u t a ls o in s ubs e que ntphone c a l l s a nd a tthe 13 J ul y r e nde z vous . A nd F a c e y ’ s c oc o n s p ir a to r s m a d e n o e f f o r t to h id e th e n a tu r e o f th e tr a n s a c tio n f

r o m h im ; in f

a c t, they e ntrust ed hi m w i th the re spon si bi l i ty of dri vi ng a van thathad b ee n l oaded w i th 600 pounds of

m a r i j ua na . S e e , e . g. , C ruz - V a l de z , 773 F . 2d a t1547 ( not i ng tha ti ti s unl i ke l y tha t“ i n the c our s e of tr a ns por t i ng ordi s tr i but i ng m i l l i ons of do l l ar s of r ea di l y m arket abl e m ar i j uana” a s m ug gl erw ou l d u se “ un af fi l i at ed b y s ta n d e r s ” ) . U n d e rL y o n s , th e e v id e n c e a d d u c e d a t F a c e y ’s tr ia l w a s s u f f ic ie n t to s u p p o r t h is c o n v ic tio n f o rc o n s p ir a c y b e y o n d a r e a s o n ab le d o u b t. T h e “ m ere p resen ce” cases are also inap p o si t e b ecau se, as n o t ed p rev i o u sl y, F a c e y di d f

a rm or e tha n be “ m e r e l y pr e s e nt ” ; i n f a c t , he vol unt e e r e d t o he l p “ t a ke th e g r e e n ,” R 1 - 1 0 6 , E x h .1 a t 2 9 , h e a rr a n g e d to p ic k it u p in a c a r g o v a n ( r e n te d inAs t o Fa ce y ’s argum entth ath e h o n es t l y b el i ev edth atth e v ano n l y co nt ai n eda l arge 4 sh ipm ent o f f

ish , in simila r d rugc on sp ira c y

c a se s w ehavestate d th at a jur y is entitle d to disbelieve such protestations of innocenc e in light of other evidencethat would support the oppo sit ec on c lus ion . T oler, 14 4 F .3 d at 14 30 . Su c h evide nc ewa s p re sente d h e re , a nd thu s a rea sonable jury

could havefound F acey

guilty despite F acey ’s “f

ish” defense. 15 som eone el se ’ s nam e) , and h e s ee m ed com fort abl e w i th the cont ent s of the van w hen h e s aw thatthe van w as l oaded w i th m ar i j uana. T hi s e vi dence w as m ore tha n s uf f i c i e nt , t a ke n t oge the r , f

ora j ury t o i nf

e rtha the w a s a know i ng pa r t i c i pa nt in th e o p e r a tio n . S e e , e .g ., U n ite d S ta te s v . C a rr a z a n a , 9 2 1 F .2 d 1 5 5 7 , 1 5 6 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ) ( s ta tin g , w h e r e th e d e f e n d a n t “p la n n [ e d ] th e p ic k u p o f a la r g e q u a n tity of c oc a i ne , ” a nd “ e xe c ut [ e d] the de l i ve ry , ” tha ta “ j ury c oul d pr e s um e tha t[ the de f e nda nt ] w a s f

a m i l i a rw i th [ the i l l e ga l a c t s ] , a nd i nf e rhi s know l e dge of

the b r o a d e r , o n g o in g c o n s p ir a c y ” ) . I n s um m a ry , i n l i ghtof

the e vi de nc e pr e s e nt e d, a r e a s onabl e j ury c oul d ha ve c onc l ude d be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubttha tF a c e y w a s a w a r e of the na tur e of

the c ons pi r a c y , a nd tha the know i ngl y pa r t i c i pa t e d i n i tby hi s c onduc t . T hus the 4 d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t e rrin d e n y in g h is m o tio n f o ra c q u itta l. B . T r a ns c r i pt s of

F a c e y ’ s R e c or de d C onve r s a t i ons F ac ey al so ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourterre d i n al l ow i ng i nt o evi dence tr a ns c r i pt s of

the t ape d a udi o r e c or di ngs of hi s c onve r s a t i ons c onc e rni ng the s m uggl i ng ope r a t i on. F a c e y ’ s a r gum e nton appe a l i s not , appa r e nt l y , tha tthe16

di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n adm i t t i ng the tra nscr i pt s i nt o evi dence, bu t , ra ther, thaton ce the tra nscr i pt s had been adm i tt ed, “ som e s af eguards” w er e nee ded t o ensure that the j ury di d notus e the tr a ns c r i pt s i m pr ope r l y dur i ng de l i be r a t i ons . B r . of A pp el l antat27 . S peci fi ca l l y, F ac ey ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourtneeded t o g i ve a l i m i t i ng i nstruct i on –i m m edi at el y pri or t o j ury del i bera t i on s–t o rem i nd the j ury that the tra nscr i pt s w er e nott o b e overl y r el i ed up on , and t hatthe tra nscr i pt s w er e in te n d e d to b e o n ly c o rr o b o r a tiv e o f th e a u d io r e c o r d in g s . I n F a c e y ’ s c a s e , D E A O f f i c e rP a rry ha d pr e pa r e d a c orr e s pondi ng tr a ns c r i pt o f each reco rd ed co n v ersat i o n b etw een th e co n fi d en t i al i n fo rm an tG o rd o n , F acey, and t he ot her drug t ra ff

i cker s i nv ol ved t hi s c as e. A ttri al , O ff i ce r P arry t es t i fi ed ab o u th i s m e th o d o f

p r e p a r i n g th e tr a n s c r i p t s f r o m th e a u d i o r e c o r d i n g s . He i ndi c a t e d he ha d tr a ns c r i be d the r e c or di ngs hi m s e l f , a nd tha ti f

the r e w e r e por t i ons th a t w e r e n o t u n d e r s ta n d ab le , h e w o u ld p u t th e w o r d “u n in te llig ib le ” in b r a c k e ts in the tr a ns c r i pt i on. H e a l s o t e s t i f i e d tha tthe tr a ns c r i pt s w e r e a c c ur a t e t o the be s tof hi s abi l i ty , a nd tha tthe y a c c ur a t e l y c aptur e d both the c ont e nta nd the i de nt i f i c a t i on of the spea kers . W hen t he go vernm entsoug htt o i ntrodu ce the tra nscr i ptof the 3 M a y m e e t i ng i nt o e vi de nc e , F a c e y ’ s c ouns e l obj e c t e d. T he di s tr i c tc our ti ndi c a t e d, co n sisten t w ith it s p re -trial ru li n g o n th is issu e, th at itw o u ld o v er ru le F ac ey ’s obj ec t i on t o the tra nscr i pt s, subj ec tt o a m ot i on t o stri ke the tra nscr i pt s i f the courtThe district cour t had advised, “We will introducethem into evidencesubject to a 5 motion to s trike if when Ilisten to the tapes I find that they

arenot accurateenough to be e vide nc eand

that th e y areon ly demon strativ e . B ut w ewi ll introd uc ethem into evide nc eat le a st as demonstrative exhibi ts for the jury to be able to f

ollow alongwith. And then if you think that they arenot accurateenough for the jur y to take them bac k into the jury room, then you can m o v e t o s tri k e th em. . . as ex h ib i t s . T h ey wo u l d s t i l lb e d em o n s trat i v e b utth ey wo u l dn ’tgo back into the jury

room.” R3 at 9. 17 s ubs e que nt l y de t e r m i ne d ( i n l i s t e ni ng t o the a udi o r e c or di ngs ) tha tthe y w e r e not su ffi ci en t l y accu rat e. T h e co u rtth en g av e th i s l i m i t i n g i n stru ct i o n t o th e j u ry: 5 I ha ve a dm i tt e d the tr a ns c r i ptf orthe l i m i t e d a nd s e c onda ry purpos e of a id in g y o u in f

o llo w in g th e c o n te n t o f

th e c o n v e r s a tio n a s y o u lis te n to th e tap e r e c o r d in g a n d a ls o a id y o u in id e n tif y in g th e s p e a k e r s . H ow e ve r , y ou a r e s pe c i f i c a l l y i ns truc t e d tha tw he the rthe tr a ns c r i pt c orr e c t l y ori nc orr e c t l y r e f l e c t s the c ont e ntof

the c onve r s a t i on orthe i de nt i ty of

the s pe a ke r s i s e nt i r e l y f ory ou t o de t e r m i ne ba s e d upon y ourow n e va l ua t i on of

the t e s t i m ony y ou ha ve he a r d c onc e rni ng the pr e pa r a t i on of

the tr a ns c r i pta nd f

r om y ourow n e xa m i na t i on of the tr a ns c r i pti n r e l a t i on t o y ourhe a r i ng of the t ape r e c or di ng i t s e l f a s the pr i m a ry e vi de nc e of

i t s ow n c ont e nt s . A nd, i f y ou s houl d de t e r m i ne th a t th e tr a n s c r ip t is in a n y r e s p e c t in c o rr e c t o ru n r e liab le , y o u s h o u ld d is r e g a r d it to th a t e x te n t. R 3 a t 7 8 - 7 9 . O n th e s e c o n d d a y o f

tr ia l, b e f o r e d ir e c t e x a m in a tio n o f O f f ic e rP a rry w a s to r e s um e , F a c e y ’ s c ouns e l r e ne w e d–out s i de of the pr e s e nc e of

the j ury–hi s obj e c t i on to th e g o v er n m en t’ s tra n sc rip ts. T h e c o u rt re it er ated th at th e tra n sc rip ts o f F ac ey ’s c onve r s a t i ons c oul d be a dm i tt e d: I a m goi ng t o l i s t e n a l ong w he n the t ape s a r e pl a y e d i n f r ontof the ju ry , a n d if

I a m s a tis f

ie d th a t th e tr a n s c r ip ts a r e s u f f ic ie n tly ac cura t e–they a re no tgo i ng t o b e ahu nd re d p er ce nt . I have never se en on e that ’ s ahu nd re d p er ce nt–b uti f I am conv i nced thatthey a re18

s u f f ic ie n tly a c c u r a te a n d a u th e n tic a te d , th e n I w ill le t th e m g o b a c k to the j ury r oom . I f

not , the n the y w e r e j us tde m ons tr a t i ve a i ds . A nd I ha ve a l r e a dy i ns truc t e d the j ury a s t o the i rus e i n tha tr e ga r d. R 4 a t10. T he c our ta l s o a dvi s e d F a c e y ’ s c ouns e l tha the w a s f r e e t o c r os s - e xa m i ne O ffi cer P arry ab o u tth e tran scri p t s an d h i s m eth o d s o f p rep arat i o n , i n o rd er t o cast d o u b to n th e accu racy o f th e tran scri p t s. F acey’s cou n sel d i d , i n fact , cro sse xa m i ne O f

f i c e rP a rry , a tt e m pt i ng t o c a s tdoubton hi s m e thods of tr a ns c r i bi ng the tap e a n d h is f

a m ilia r ity w ith J a m a ic a n s la n g . D i r e c te xa m i na t i on of

O f f i c e rP a rry the n r e - c om m e nc e d. W he n the gove rnm e ntof

f e r e d i nt o e vi de nc e a n a udi o t ape a nd i t s a c c om pa ny i ng tr a ns c r i ptof a J u ly 2 0 0 4 te le p h o n e c o n v e r s a tio n b e tw e e n G o r d o n a n d F a c e y , F a c e y a g a in o b je c te d to th e a u th e n tic ity o f th e tr a n s c r ip t. T h e c o u r t r e c e iv e d th e tr a n s c r ip t w ith the sa m e l i m i t i ng i nstruct i on thati thad g i ven t he j ury r egar di ng the ea rl i er tr a n s c r ip ts . T h is s a m e p r o c e s s r e p e a te d its e lf a n u m b ero f tim es , w ith F ac ey ’s c o u n s e l o b

je c tin g to th e tr a n s c r ip ts b e in g a d m itte d a n d th e c o u r t p e r m ittin g th e m to b e a d m itte d , s u b

je c t to its e a r lie rlim itin g in s tru c tio n to th e ju ry . T ow ar ds the concl usi on of the go vernm ent ’ s c as e i n chi ef , the court obs e r ve d: “ [ s ] o f

a r , I don’ ts e e a ny pr obl e m w i th a ny of the tr a ns c r i pt s . I thi nk the tr a ns c r i pt s a r e a m ong the m or e a c c ur a t e tr a ns c r i pt s I ha ve e ve rs e e n. ” R 4 a t193. T he j ury w a s s ubs e que nt l y pe r m i tt e d t o t a ke the tr a ns c r i pt s of the phone19

c o n v e r s a tio n s in to th e d e lib e r a tio n s r o o m , a lo n g w ith th e a u d io r e c o r d in g s . A lth o u g h th e d is tr ic t c o u r t g a v e th e s a m e lim itin g in s tru c tio n to th e ju ry p r io rto its r e c e iv in g e a c h in d iv id u a l tr a n s c r ip t, n o s u c h lim itin g in s tru c tio n w a s g iv e n p r io rto d e lib e r a tio n s . O n app ea l , F ac ey ar gu es that“ som e s af eguards” s ho ul d h ave been i m po se d pr i ort o gi vi ng the tr a ns c r i pt s t o the j ury , s uc h a s a l i m i t i ng i ns truc t i on

“ i m m e di at e l

y pr i orto de l i be r at i ons . ” B r. of A pp el l antat27 -29. H e c on t ends that the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s f

a i l ur e t o do s o c r e a t e d the r i s k tha tthe j ury ove r l y r e l i e d on the c orr obor a t i ve tr a ns c r i pt s r a the rtha n the ( m or e a c c ur a t e ) a udi o r e c or di ngs , the r e by cau si n g h i m p rej u d i ce. A s t o th e ad m i ssi o n o f ev i d en ce, “ [w ] e rev i ew o n an ab u se of di sc re t i on st andard. ” U ni t ed S t at es v. S m i th, 91 8 F . 2d 15 01 , 15 10 (11th C i r. 1 9 9 0 ) ; s e e a ls o U n ite d S ta te s v . O n o r i, 5 3 5 F .2 d 9 3 8 , 9 4 7 ( 5 th C ir . 1 9 7 6 ) . W e have s t at ed thati ti s a“ w el l -e st abl i shed” rul e thata di stri ctcourtm ay perm i ta c orrobo ra t i ve tra nscr i ptof an audi o rec ordi ng t o b e a dm i tt ed and p rovi ded t o a j ury duri ng del i bera t i on s, so as t o ass i stthe j ury i n u nd er st andi ng the ori gi nal r e c o r d in g . U n ite d S ta te s v . R e e d , 8 8 7 F .2 d 1 3 9 8 , 1 4 0 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 9 ) . I n O n o r i, ou r pre dece ss or ci rc ui texpl ai ned t he pu rpose behi nd thi s rul e: T h e n e e d o rd e s i r e f

o rtr a n s c r i p t s a r i s e s g e n e r a l l y f r o m two ci rc um st ance s. F i rs t , po rt i on s of at ape m ay be re l at i vel y i naud i bl e. S ec on d, w i tho utthe ai d o f atra nscr i pt , i tm ay be di ff i cul tt o i dent i fy th e s p e a k e r s . I n e ith e ro f th e s e c a s e s , it h a s b e e n s a id th a t it is w ith in20

the di s c r e t i on of

the tr i a l c our tt o a l l ow a tr a ns c r i ptt o be us e d by the j ury t o ass i stthe j ury a s i tl i st ens t o the t ape. W e be l i e ve tha tthe us e of a tr a ns c r i pta s a gui de i s a na l ogous t o the us e of e xpe r tt e s t i m ony a s a de vi c e a i di ng a j ury i n unde r s t a ndi ng other types of re al evi dence . . . . T hey a re evi dence and, l i ke ot her e v id e n c e , m a y b e a d m itte d f o ra lim ite d p u rp o s e . . . . 53 5 F . 2d 93 8, 94 7-48 (c i t at i on and i nt ernal qu ot at i on s om i tt ed). W e have further i nd i ca t ed thatw hen t here i s adi sput e over the ac cura cy of a tra nscr i pt , the prop er p r o t o c o l i s f

o r“ e a c h s i d e [ t o ] p r o d u c e i t s o wn v e r s i o n o f a tr a n s c r i p to ri t s o wn vers i on of the di sput ed po rt i on s. In addi t i on , ea ch si de m ay pu ton evi dence supp ort i ng the ac cura cy of i t s ow n v er si on or chal l engi ng the ac cura cy of the ot her si de’ s ver si on . ” U ni t ed S t at es v. H og an, 98 6 F . 2d 13 64 , 13 76 (11th C i r. 19 93 ). In thi s c as e, F ac ey di d n otprod uce hi s ow n v er si on of the di sput ed tran sc rip ts, n o r d id h e c as t sig n ifican t d o u b t o n th e a cc u ra cy o f th e g o v er n m en t’ s ve r s i on, othe rtha n thr ough a br i e f c r os s - e xa m i na t i on of

O f f i c e rP a rry . I n f

a c t , the re cord sugg es t s thatthe tra nscr i pt s w er e a cc urat e r eprodu ct i on s of the re corded c onve r s a t i ons ; O f

f i c e rP a rry t e s t i f

i e d tha tthe y w e r e a c c ur a t e both a s t o the c ont e nt and t he i dent i ty of the spea kers , and t he di stri ctcourtfoun d them t o b e

“ a m ong the m or e a c c ur a t e tr a ns c r i pt s [ i t ] [ ha d] e ve rs e e n. ” R 4 a t193. I n a ddi t i on, a s n o te d , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t g a v e a lim itin g in s tru c tio n to th e ju ry– c a r e f u lly del i neat i ng the l i m i t ed pu rpose f or w hi ch the tra nscr i pt s w er e t o b e use d– before21

a dm i tt i ng e a c h one i nt o e vi de nc e . T ha ti ns truc t i on w a s w hol l y c ongrue ntw i th the r e a s o n in g o f

O n o r i. M o r e o v e r , o n ap p e a l F a c e y h a s f a ile d to s h o w h o w , if

a t a ll, th e tr a n s c r ip ts w e r e i na c c ur a t e ; r a the r , hi s a r gum e nti s tha tthe f a i l ur e t o t a ke pr ope rs a f e gua r ds w i th the tr a ns c r i pt s c oul d hy pothe t i c a l l y ha ve l e d the j ury t o m i s us e the m , the r e by c a u s in g h im p r e

ju d ic e . T h is c o n te n tio n is n o t s u f f ic ie n t to w a rr a n t a r e v e r s a l o f h is conv i ct i on . S ee , e. g. , R ee d, 88 7 F . 2d at14 07 (a ff i rm i ng conv i ct i on w here defe nd ant“ has notqu es t i on ed the ac cura cy of the tra nscr i pt s” bu t“ has a ss ert ed onl y a ge ne r a l c l a i m tha the w a s pr e j udi c e d by the j ury ’ s a l l e ge d us e of the tra nscr i pt s” ). In sum m ary, F ac ey has f ai l ed t o est abl i sh thatthe di stri ctcourt ab u s e d its d is c r e tio n in a d m ittin g th e tr a n s c r ip ts a n d p r o v id in g th e m to th e ju ry . I I I . CONCL US I ON F a c e y appe a l e d hi s drug c ons pi r a c y c onvi c t i on pur s ua ntt o 21 U . S . C . §§ 846 a nd 848, c ont e ndi ng: ( 1) tha tthe r e w a s i ns uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e t o s uppor thi s drug c o n s p ir a c y c o n v ic tio n a n d th a t th e r e f o r e th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d in d e n y in g h is m ot i on for j ud gm entof ac qu i tt al pu rs uantt o F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 29 (c ); and (2) thatthe di stri ctcourterre d i n sub m i tt i ng tra nscr i pt s of r ec orded conv er sa t i on s t o the j ury w i tho utusi ng addi t i on al sa fe gu ar ds t o ensure thatthey w e r e us e d f

ora l i m i t e d purpos e . U pon c a r e f ul r e vi e w of

the r e c or d, w e c onc l ude22

tha tthe r e w a s a m pl e e vi de nc e f r om w hi c h a r e a s onabl e j ury c oul d ha ve f ound F a c e y gui l ty be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubton the drug c ons pi r a c y c onvi c t i on, a nd th a t th e r e f

o r e th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a c te d p r o p e r ly in d e n y in g F a c e y ’s R u le 2 9 m o tio n . W e a l s o f

i nd no e vi de nc e tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tabus e d i t s di s c r e t i on i n a dm i tt i ng the tra nscr i pt s of F ac ey ’ s r ec orded con vers at i on s a nd i n p rovi di ng them t o the j ury w i th a l i m i t i n g i n stru ct i o n . A cco rd i n g l y, F acey’s con v i ct i o n i s AF F I RME D.