Opinion ID: 3061833
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: We review de novo whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. United States v. Garcia, 405 F.3d 1260, 1269 (11th Cir. 2005). We must affirm a defendant’s convictions unless there is no reasonable construction of the evidence under which the jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. All reasonable inferences and credibility choices must be made in favor of the jury’s verdict. United States v. Massey, 89 F.3d 1433, 1438 (11th Cir. 1996). To support a conviction for possession with the intent to distribute a controlled substance, the government must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly possessed the drugs with the intent to distribute them. United States v. Garcia-Bercovich, 582 F.3d 1234, 1237 (11th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 1562 (2010). Each of these elements can be proved by 1 Moorer preserved his challenge by moving for judgment of acquittal at the close of the government’s case. Moorer did not present any defense witnesses or evidence. 4 direct or circumstantial evidence. United States v. Miranda, 425 F.3d 953, 959 (11th Cir. 2005). We allow an inference of the intent to distribute based on the amount of the drug involved. United States v. Hernandez, 433 F.3d 1328, 1333 (11th Cir. 2005). Additionally, ‘the existence of implements such as scales commonly used in connection with the distribution of cocaine’ may serve as circumstantial proof of the intent to distribute cocaine. United States v. Poole, 878 F.2d 1389, 1392 (11th Cir. 1989). A defendant’s prior convictions for drug offenses are also admissible for the limited purpose of determining whether the defendant formed the requisite intent to distribute. United States v. Cardenas, 895 F.2d 1338, 1344 (11th Cir. 1990). In this case, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. The evidence at trial showed that Moorer possessed cocaine in an amount inconsistent with personal use. Specifically, authorities found cocaine, a firearm, a digital scale with cocaine residue, and multiple bundles of money during the searches of Moorer’s residence and car. Furthermore, the jury was permitted to infer the intent to distribute based on the quantity of drugs involved and Moorer’s prior convictions for controlled substance offenses. Accordingly, there was sufficient evidence to convict Moorer of the charge and we affirm his conviction. 5