Opinion ID: 182629
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sufficiency of the Evidence Against Davis

Text: When reviewing for the sufficiency of evidence in support of a jury verdict, this Court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and gives the prosecution the benefit of all reasonable inferences from the testimony. The question the court must ask is whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. 8 Nos. 09-5200, 09-5201 United States v. Caver, 470 F.3d 220, 232 (6th Cir. 2006). “[A] defendant claiming insufficiency of the evidence bears a very heavy burden.” United States v. Jackson, 473 F.3d 660, 669 (6th Cir. 2007). The Court is “bound to make all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in support of the jury’s verdict.” Id. at 669-70.
Davis was convicted of conspiring to intentionally distribute, and conspiring to knowingly and intentionally possess 500 grams or more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and of knowingly and intelligently possessing with intent to distribute, and distributing 500 grams or more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and 18 U.S.C. §2. The elements of a conspiracy are: “(1) an object to be accomplished. (2) A plan or scheme embodying the means to accomplish that object. (3) An agreement or understanding between two or more [individuals] whereby they become definitely committed to cooperate for the accomplishment of the object by the means embodied in the agreement, or by any effectual means.” Caver, 470 F.3d at 232 (internal quotations and citation omitted). In the context of a conspiracy to violate the federal drug laws, “the government must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, (1) an agreement to violate drug laws, (2) knowledge and intent to join the conspiracy, and (3) participation in the conspiracy.” Id. (internal quotations and citations omitted). This Court explained in Caver that a “vertical pattern of [drug] distribution” can form a ‘chain’ conspiracy where an agreement to supply drugs to a given area can be inferred from the interdependence of the enterprise. That said, the agreement to enter into a transaction . . . is not equivalent to the agreement needed to support a conviction for conspiracy . . . [which] must be based on evidence from which a 9 Nos. 09-5200, 09-5201 rational trier of fact could find that the defendant had knowledge of the conspiracy itself, and purposefully joined the conspiracy. Id. at 233. “Proof of a formal agreement is not required to establish a conspiracy; a tacit or material understanding among the parties is sufficient.” United States v. Driver, 535 F.3d 424, 429 (6th Cir. 2008). Evidence demonstrating Davis’ involvement in the drug conspiracy was presented at trial in two forms: through testimony of co-conspirators who had entered into plea agreements with the government, and through phone calls that the government had intercepted through its wiretap on Chapparo’s and Arturo’s phone lines. Davis initially became involved with Chapparo and Arturo when Arturo asked Tyshawn, Davis’ nephew, if he knew anyone outside of Nashville who might be interested in buying and distributing cocaine. Tyshawn responded that his uncle in Memphis, Davis, might be interested. Chapparo testified that he first met Davis on July 31, 2006 at a recreation center by a lake with Arturo and Tyshawn. Tyshawn, Allen Conner, and Davis arrived at the meeting in a blue SUV that authorities later determined was registered to Davis and his wife. At this meeting Arturo agreed to give Davis one kilogram of cocaine on credit, which Arturo directed Chapparo to provide. Later that day authorities intercepted a call in which Davis asked Chapparo when Davis would receive the kilogram of cocaine, and Chapparo promised to have it delivered later that day. Conner testified that Davis received the kilogram of cocaine at a car wash in Nashville. Arturo testified that Tellez delivered the cocaine to Davis. Davis and Conner agreed that they would resell the kilogram of cocaine in Memphis, and split the profits. Conner was arrested in Memphis with the kilogram of cocaine. Davis met with Arturo and Chapparo a number of times to discuss 10 Nos. 09-5200, 09-5201 payment after Davis failed to pay for the cocaine. Tyshawn also identified Davis’ voice on several calls intercepted on Chapparo’s phone. Davis argues that the government’s evidence against him is insufficient because “[e]very witness for the prosecution . . . worked for the government in some capacity . . . as an employee, in the case of the federal agents or, in the case of the several alleged co-conspirators, in order to obtain favorable treatment in their own criminal matter.” (Br. of Appellant Davis at 19.) Davis further asserts that the government’s only other witnesses against Davis never “testified they ever saw him with drugs; rather each testified that they heard about it or inferred it from other conversations.” (Id. at 20.) To be clear, Davis is not appealing the district court’s decision to admit any of the government’s evidence against him. Davis is only arguing that based on witness’ credibility and the circumstantial nature of some of the evidence, the evidence presented is insufficient to convict him. This Court has held, however, that in reviewing a conviction for sufficiency of the evidence, conspiracy can be inferred through circumstantial evidence. Caver, 470 F.3d at 233. Viewing the evidence in “the light most favorable to the prosecution,” we cannot conclude that no “rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 232. The evidence regarding Davis’ drug convictions is sufficient, as multiple witnesses testified that Davis received cocaine from Chapparo and Arturo. The evidence regarding Davis’ conspiracy conviction is not quite as strong, as there is no direct testimony that Davis entered into the drug transactions intending to join the drug conspiracy. However, there are sufficient circumstances that a reasonable trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt that 11 Nos. 09-5200, 09-5201 Davis was guilty of conspiracy. These include, Davis’ numerous contacts with Chapparo and Arturo, his plan with Conner to resell the cocaine, and Tyshawn’s statement that Davis became involved with Chapparo and Arturo after Chapparo asked Tyshawn if he knew anyone interested in cocaine outside of Nashville. There is sufficient evidence to sustain both of Davis’ convictions.