FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT A ugus t 15, 2005 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. 04- 16533 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 0 0 0 3 4 - CR- 4 - 0 1 - RH 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 M I C H A E L L E V O N H I L L S , 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 N or the rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A ugus t15, 2005) B efo re B L A C K , W IL S O N an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: M ic h a e l L e v o n H ills ap p e a ls h is c o n v ic tio n s a n d c o n c u rr e n t 1 2 0 - m o n th2

s e n te n c e s im p o s e d f

o rc o n s p ir a c y to d is tr ib u te a n d to p o s s e s s w ith in te n t to di s tr i but e m or e tha n 5 gr a m s of c r a c k c oc a i ne , i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . § 846; a nd p o s s e s s io n w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te m o r e th a n 5 g r a m s o f c r a c k c o c a in e , in vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . §§ 841( a ) ( 1) a nd 841( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( i i i ) , a nd 18 U . S . C . § 2.

I . B AC KG R OU ND O n M a y 5, 2004, H i l l s s poke on the t e l e phone w i th a c onf i de nt i a l i nf

or m a nt (“ C I” ) w ho w as as si st i ng l aw enforce m ent . D uri ng the ca l l s, w hi ch w er e r ec orded and adm i tt ed as evi dence attri al , H i l l s a nd the C I di sc usse d “ cook i es , ” at erm c o mmo n l y u s e d t o r e f

e rt o c r a c k c o c a i n e , a s w e l l a s “ p o w d e r ” a n d “ h a r d , ” t e r ms us e d t o di f

f e r e nt i a t e be tw e e n di f

f e r e ntf or m s of c oc a i ne . T he C I t ol d H i l l s the a m o u n t o f

d ru g s n e e d e d , a s w e ll a s w h e r e th e d ru g d e a l w a s to ta k e p la c e . H ills t ol d the C I tha the w a s try i ng t o f i nd s om e one t o s uppl y the c oc a i ne , a nd tha the w oul d c a l l the C I ba c k. O n the m orni ng of M ay 6, 20 04 , H i l l s c al l ed A l ford C ot t on , w ho t es t i fi ed agai nstH i l l s a ttri al . A cc ordi ng t o C ot t on ’ s t es t i m on y, H i l l s c al l ed C ot t on that m orni ng t o t el l hi m thatsom eone w ant ed t o b uy tw o “ cook i es . ” C ot t on t es t i fi ed tha the pr om i s e d t o pr ovi de H i l l s w i th e i the r$400 f r om the drug s a l e or$400 w orth o f drugs for s ett i ng up the deal . C ot t on further t es t i fi ed thathe i nstruct ed H i l l s t o m e e thi m i n the W i nn- D i xi e pa r ki ng l oti n M ont i c e l l o, F l or i da , a nd ga ve3

H i l l s di r e c t i ons . A c c or di ng t o t e l e phone r e c or ds , s e ve r a l phone c a l l s w e r e m a de f r o m H ills ’ h o m e p h o n e to C o tto n ’s c e ll p h o n e o n th e m o rn in g o f M a y 6 , 2 0 0 4 . C ott on t e s t i f

i e d tha the pi c ke d up H i l l s a nd the y dr ove t oge the rf r om T a lla h a s s e e , F lo r id a , to th e W in n - D ix ie in M o n tic e llo . A c c o r d in g to C o tto n , H ills sa i d thatthe drug s w er e “ cl ea n. ” M ea nw hi l e, an un derc ov eroffi ce r a cc om pani ed the C I t o the W i nn- D i xi e . T he unde r c ove rof f i c e rt e s t i f

i e d tha tC ott on c a l l e d the C I t o f i nd outw he r e the y w e r e l oc a t e d. S hor t l y a f t e rthe of f i c e ra nd C I a rr i ve d, H ills w a s o b s e r v e d e x itin g th e W in n - D ix ie a n d h e a d in g b a c k to w a r d s C o tto n ’s c a r . T h e o f f ic e rte s tif

ie d th a t H ills th e n ap p r o a c h e d th e u n d e r c o v e rc a ra n d s p o k e w ith the C I , a nd tha the w a s i ntr oduc e d t o H i l l s a ttha tt i m e . H i l l s r e que s t e d tha tthe o f f ic e ra n d C I g o to C o tto n ’s v e h ic le . T h e o f f ic e rg a v e th e C I th e p u r c h a s e m o n e y . A s the C I s t art ed t o cou ntthe m on ey for C ot t on , the offi ce r t es t i fi ed thathe sa w C ot t on re tri eve abrow n p aperbag from un der the pass enger s ea t . C ot t on hand ed the ba g t o the of

f i c e r , w ho l ooke d i n the ba g a nd i de nt i f i e d i ta s c r a c k c oc a i ne . T he offi ce r w i tness ed the tra nsac t i on , and an aud i ot ape of the tra nsac t i on w as adm i tt ed in to e v id e n c e a t tr ia l. O n A u g u s t 1 0 , 2 0 0 4 , th e ju ry r e tu rn e d a v e r d ic t o f g u ilty o n b o th c o u n ts . T h e d i stri ctco u rtsen t en ced H i l l s t o 1 2 0 m o n th s o n each co u n tt o ru n co n cu rren t l y, and ei gh tye ar s of s up ervi se d rel ea se . H i l l s app ea l s, ar gu i ng fi rs tthatthe evi dence4

w a s i ns uf

f i c i e ntt o s uppor tthe j ury ’ s ve r di c ton e a c h c ount . W i th r e s pe c tt o the c o n s p ir a c y c h a r g e , H ills a r g u e s th a t th e r e w a s n o a g r e e m e n t b e tw e e n h im a n d h is c o- c ons pi r a t ort o s e l l drugs . H i l l s a s s e r t s tha tbe c a us e the e vi de nc e s uppor t i ng the c o u n t o f p o s s e s s io n w a s b a s e d s o le ly o n h is c o - c o n s p ir a to r ’s te s tim o n y , it s h o u ld be di sc ou nt ed as se l f- se rvi ng and n otcr edi bl e. H i l l s nextar gu es thathi s s ent ence s h o u ld b e v a c a te d b e c a u s e th e g o v e rn m e n t d id n o t r e f e rto h is p r io rc o n v ic tio n in i t s i nd i ctm ent , ye tthe di stri ctcourtused i tt o enh ance hi s s ent ence . H i l l s a rgues tha tthe r e c e ntde c i s i on i n Sh epard v. U ni ted Stat es , 5 4 4 U .S . ____ , 1 2 5 S . C t. 1 2 5 4 ( 2 0 0 5 ) , s u g g e s t s th a tp r i o rc o n v i c t i o n s mi g h tb e s u b j e c tt o th e s a me c ons t i tut i ona l r e qui r e m e nt s a s othe rf a c t s notf ound by the j ury ora dm i tt e d by the defe nd antun der App re nd iv. N ew Je rs ey , 53 0 U . S . 46 6, 12 0 S . C t . 23 48 (200 0). I I . ST AN DA RDS OF R EVI EW W e r evi ew “ the suff

i ci ency of the evi dence de no vo , v ie w in g th e e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f

a v o r ab le to th e g o v e rn m e n t a n d d r a w in g a ll r e a s o n ab le in f e r e n c e s in fa vo r of the j ury’ s ver di ct . ” U n i ted S ta tes v. C a stro , 89 F . 3d 14 43 , 14 50 (11th C i r. 1996) . D e t e r m i na t i ons of the c r e di bi l i ty of

w i tne s s e s f

a l l w i thi n the e xc l us i ve prov i nce of the j ury a nd m ay no tbe re vi si t ed un l es s the t es t i m on y i s “ i ncre di bl e a s a m att erof l aw . ” U

ni t e d Stat e s v . C alde r on , 127 F . 3d 1314, 1325 ( 11th C i r . 1997) ( c i t a t i ons om i tt e d) . T o be i nc r e di bl e a s a m a tt e rof l a w , the t e s t i m ony m us tbe5

“ un bel i evabl e on i t s f

ac e. ” I d. ( quot a t i on m a r ks a nd c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . I n a ddi t i on, the t es t i m on y of aco-c on spi ra t or, even i f uncorrobo ra t ed, “ i s s uffi ci entt o sup po rt a c on vi ct i on i f i ti s not , on i t s f ac e, i ncre di bl e or otherw i se i nsub st ant i al . ” See U ni te d Stat e s v . D i az , 24 8 F . 3d 10 65 , 10 93 -94 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). W i th r e ga r d t o H i l l s ’ c ha l l e nge t o hi s s e nt e nc e , w e r e vi e w f orpl a i n e rr or w h e n a d e f

e n d a n t d id n o t o b

je c t a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to th e g o v e rn m e n t’s f a ilu r e to r e f e r e n c e h is p r io rc o n v ic tio n in th e in d ic tm e n t. See U ni ted Stat es v. R odri

gu ez , 3 9 8 F .3 d 1 2 9 1 , 1 2 9 8 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , ce rt. deni ed 12 5 S . C t . 29 35 (200 5). W e “ m ay n o t c o rr e c t a n e rr o rth e d e f e n d a n t f a ile d to r a is e in th e d is tr ic t c o u r t u n le s s th e r e is : (1) e rr or, (2) thati s pl ai n, and (3) thataf fe ct s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s. If al l three cond i t i on s a re m et , an appel l at e c ou rtm ay then exerci se i t s di sc re t i on t o n ot i ce a f or f e i t e d e rr or , butonl y i f

( 4) the e rr ors e r i ous l y a f f e c t s the f a i rne s s , i nt e gr i ty , or pu bl i c r eput at i on of j ud i ci al proceedi ng s. ” I d. ( quot a t i on m a r ks a nd c i t a t i ons om i tt ed). I I I . DI S C US S I ON A . S u ff

i ci en cy of th e E vi d en ce T o s us t a i n a c onvi c t i on f orc ons pi r a c y w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e , the g o v e rn m e n t m u s t s h o w : tha ta n a gr e e m e nte xi s t e d be tw e e n tw o orm or e pe r s ons t o vi ol a t e the na r c ot i c s l a w s , tha tthe de f e nda ntkne w of

the c ons pi r a t or i a l goa l , a nd6

th a t h e k n o w in g ly jo in e d o rp a r tic ip a te d in th e ille g a l v e n tu r e . . . . T he gove rnm e ntdoe s notha ve t o pr ove tha tthe a l l e ge d c ons pi r a t or k n e w a ll o f

th e d e ta ils o f

th e c o n s p ir a c y o rth a t h e p a r tic ip a te d in e ve ry pha s e of

the s c he m e . T he gove rnm e ntm a y e s t abl i s h a de f e nda nt ’ s know i ng pa r t i c i pa t i on i n the c ons pi r a c y thr ough pr oof of s urr oundi ng c i r c um s t a nc e s , s uc h a s a c t s c om m i tt e d by the de f e nda nt th a t f u r th e r e d th e p u rp o s e o f

th e c o n s p ir a c y . U n i ted S ta t es v. G u errero , 935 F . 2d 189, 192 ( 11th C i r . 1991) ( i nt e rna l c i t a t i ons om i tt ed). W i th res pectt o the subst ant i ve coun tof po ss es si on w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e,

“ the gove rnm e ntm us tpr ove be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubttha tthe de f e nda nt k n o w in g ly p o s s e s s e d th e [ c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e ] a n d th a t h e in te n d e d to d is tr ib u te i t . ” U n ite d S ta te s v . Me

jia , 9 7 F .3 d 1 3 9 1 , 1 3 9 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) .

“ P os s e s s i on m a y be a c tua l orc ons truc t i ve , a nd the l a tt e rc a n be e s t abl i s he d by e vi de nc e s how i ng ow ne r s hi p, dom i ni on, orc ontr ol ove rthe c ontr aba nd i t s e l f orthe p r e m is e s o n w h ic h it is c o n c e a le d . C o n s tru c tiv e p o s s e s s io n m a y b e s h a r e d w ith others , and can be est abl i shed by ci rc um st ant i al or di re ctevi dence. ” U ni ted Stat es v . Mont e s - C ar de nas , 746 F . 2d 771, 778 ( 11th C i r . 1984) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . T he

“ [i ] nt entt o d i stri bu t e m ay be i nferre d from the qu ant i ty of [ the drug s] se i ze d. ” I d. a t778- 79. E v en i f so m eo n e el se ex erci sed actu al co n tro l o v er th e d ru g s, H i l l s’ c o n v ic tio n m a y b e a f

f ir m e d b e c a u s e h e a id e d a n d ab e tte d th e p o s s e s s io n . See7

U n ite d S ta te s v . Sc h w a r tz , 6 6 6 F . 2 d 4 6 1 , 4 6 3 (1 1 th C i r. 1 9 8 2 ). C o u n t2 o f H i l l s’ i nd i ctm entchar ged a vi ol at i on of 18 U . S . C . § 2 (the ai di ng and abett i ng st atut e) as w e l l a s 21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) ( the s ubs t a nt i ve pos s e s s i on pr ovi s i on) . T hus , the tri al courtprop er l y i nstruct ed the j ury thatthe defendantcoul d b e c on vi ct ed as pri nci pal s i f they a i ded and abett ed the com m i ss i on of the cr i m e. T o s us t a i n a c onvi c t i on f ora i di ng a nd abe tt i ng, the gove rnm e ntm us ts how th a t a d e f

e n d a n t: as soci at ed hi m se l f w i th a cr i m i nal venture, part i ci pat ed i n i tas s om e thi ng he w i s he d t o br i ng abouta nd s oughtby hi s a c t i ons t o m a ke i ts uc c e e d. M or e ove r , i n the c ont e xtof a pr os e c ut i on f

ora i di ng a nd ab e ttin g th e p o s s e s s io n o f [ a c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e ] w ith in te n t to di stri bu t e, the go vernm entm usti ntrodu ce evi dence connect i ng [the] d e f e n d a n t w ith b o th a s p e c ts o f th e c r im e , p o s s e s s io n a n d in te n t to d is tr ib u te . U n ite d S ta te s v . B a in , 736 F . 2d 1480, 1487 ( 11th C i r . 1984) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m arks and ci t at i on s om i tt ed). T h e to ta lity o f

th e e v id e n c e in th is c a s e s u p p o r ts th e ju ry ’s v e r d ic t o n b o th c o u n ts . W ith r e g a r d to th e c o n s p ir a c y c o u n t, a ll o f H ills ’ a c tio n s — h is c a lls to C ot t on se eki ng “ cook i es , ” hi s r equestthatthe C I a nd un derc ov eroffi ce r c om e over t o C ot t on ’ s vehi cl e, and the tra nsac t i on i t se l f — evi dence an agre em entbetw ee n C ott on a nd hi m t o vi ol a t e the na r c ot i c s l a w s . F ur the r m or e , the r e c or d s uppor t s the j ury’ s f i nd i ng thatH i l l s had kn ow l edge of the conspi ra t ori al go al and i l l egal8

ve ntur e . H i l l s ’ di s c us s i on w i th the C I about“ c ooki e s , ” “ pow de r ” a nd “ ha r d; ” the C I ’ s r e que s tf

orac e r t a i n a m ountof

drugs ; a nd hi s s t a t e m e ntt o C ott on tha tthe drugs w e r e “ c l e a n” i ndi c a t e H i l l s ’ know l e dge of the goa l of

the c ons pi r a c y a nd the ille g a l n a tu r e o f

th e tr a n s a c tio n . In addi t i on , w i th res pectt o the po ss es si on coun t , the j ury c ou l d h ave i nferre d tha t , a l though i ts e e m s tha tH i l l s di d notha ve a c tua l pos s e s s i on ove rthe drugs , he ha d c ons truc t i ve pos s e s s i on ove rthe m ba s e d on the t e r m s of hi s de a l w i th C ott on, i . e. thathe w ou l d share profi t s f rom the tra nsac t i on . F i nal l y, the un derc ov er offi ce r’ s t es t i m on y observi ng the drug tra nsac t i on supp ort s the j ury’ s f i nd i ng that H i l l s a i de d a nd abe tt e d hi s c o- c ons pi r a t ori n pos s e s s i ng the drugs . B e c a us e the j ury ’ s ve r di c t s a r e s uppor t e d by s uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e , w e a f

f i r m H i l l s ’ c onvi c t i on on th e co u n to f co n sp i racy. B. B la k e ly /

B oo ker I n A lm enda rez- T

orre s v . U

ni ted Stat es , 523 U . S . 224, 247, 118 S . C t . 1219, 1233 ( 1998) , the S upr e m e C our the l d tha tr e c i di vi s m i s nota s e pa r a t e e l e m e ntof the of f e ns e tha tthe gove rnm e ntm us ta l l e ge i n the i ndi c tm e nta nd pr ove be y ond a r e a s o n ab le d o u b t. See al so U ni t ed Stat es v. O rdun o-Mi re l es , 405 F . 3d 960, 962 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( not i ng tha ti n B oo ke r , th e S u p r e m e C o u r t le f t its h o ld in g in A lm en da rez-T

o rres u n d is tu rb e d ) . M o r e o v e r , w e h a v e n o te d r e c e n tly th a t, w h ile9

the S upr e m e C our t ’ s de c i s i on i n Sh epard v. U ni ted Stat es , __U .S . __ , 1 2 5 S . C t. 12 54 (200 5), ar gu abl y c as tdo ub ton the prece dent i al val ue of A lm enda rez- T orre s , the S upr e m e C our tha s note xpl i c i t l y ove rrul e d A lm enda rez- T orre s . See U

ni ted Stat es v. C am acho -I

ba rquen , 4 1 0 F . 3 d 1 3 0 7 , 1 3 1 6 n . 3 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ). A s a r e s u l t , we m u s tf

o l l o w A lm enda rez- T

orre s a s c o n tr o llin g p r e c e d e n t. Se e i d. B e c a u s e th e g o v e rn m e n t w a s n o t r e q u ir e d to a lle g e H ills ’ p r io rc o n v ic tio n in the i ndi c tm e ntnorpr ove the c onvi c t i on be y ond a r e a s onabl e doubtt o the j ury , the di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rr , pl a i nl y orothe rw i s e , i n i m pos i ng a s t a tut ory m i ni m um se nt ence un der 21 U . S . C . § 8 41 . T hu s, w e a ff i rm H i l l s’ se nt ence . I V. C ON C L US I ON B ased o n th e fo reg o i n g , an d u p o n rev i ew o f th e reco rd an d th e p art i es’ b ri efs, w e affi rm H i l l s’ co n v i ct i o n s an d sen t en ces. AF F I RME D.