1

The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern

District of Iowa. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3187

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

Jermaine T. Bryson, also known as JD, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 15, 2010

Filed: May 7, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jermaine Bryson appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine base (crack

cocaine) with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A).

Bryson argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdict and that

he was therefore entitled to a judgment of acquittal. We affirm the district court’s1

judgment. 
-2-

On December 18, 2004, Fort Dodge, Iowa, Police Officer Laura Myers,

recognized Bryson and arrested him for operating a vehicle with a suspended license.

Bryson denied his true identity and gave Myers a false name. Officer Dan Steck

arrived at the scene and confirmed Bryson’s identity. When Bryson was asked to exit

the vehicle, he attempted to flee and was apprehended a short distance away. Steck

and Webster County Sheriff’s Deputy Jayson Heesch conducted a search incident to

arrest, which led to the discovery and seizure of $618 and a plastic baggie containing

7.87 grams of crack cocaine from Bryson’s person. No paraphernalia associated with

drug use was found on Bryson or in the vehicle. Following his arrest, Bryson told

Myers that the substance was cocaine, that it was intended for personal use, and that

Myers should dispose of it. 

At trial, a Sioux City police officer experienced with drug trafficking testified

that crack cocaine users typically have user paraphernalia on their person and that

users typically spend all money available to them on purchasing drugs. The officer

testified that possession of more than 3.5 grams of crack cocaine is consistent with

distribution. He also explained that some distributors of crack cocaine do not package

the drugs and instead simply hand out individual portions by “eyeballing” the

quantity. 

We will reverse a conviction for insufficient evidence only if, accepting all

reasonable inferences that support the verdict, no reasonable jury could find the

defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Spears, 454 F.3d 830,

832 (8th Cir. 2006). Based on the evidence that Bryson possessed a quantity of drugs

consistent with distribution and some $618 in cash, and did not possess user

paraphernalia, the jury could reasonably infer Bryson’s intent to distribute. See

United States v. Bell, 477 F.3d 607, 613 (8th Cir. 2007) (evidence sufficient to prove

possession with intent to distribute where officers found about seven grams of crack

cocaine, which testimony indicated was greater than personal-use amount, and where
-3-

there was no indicia of personal use of crack cocaine, such as pipes). Accordingly,

the district court did not err in denying Bryson’s motion for judgment of acquittal. 

The judgment is affirmed. 

______________________________