Opinion ID: 199459
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Attempt to Possess with Intent to Distribute Cocaine

Text: 10 Burgos was convicted of attempting to possess cocaine with intent to distribute it, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) 1 and 21 U.S.C. §§ 846. 2 He argues that a rational jury could not have convicted him because there was no actual cocaine involved in the transaction between him and O'Neil. The government concedes that Burgos was arrested before he came into possession of any cocaine, and that O'Neil did not have any cocaine with him when he met Burgos to complete the transaction. 11 Contrary to Burgos's assertion, neither O'Neil nor Burgos had to possess cocaine at the time of the contemplated transaction to satisfy the elements of this crime. To prove attempt, the government must establish both an intent to commit the substantive offense and a substantial step towards its commission. United States v. Argencourt, 996 F.2d 1300, 1303 (1st Cir. 1993) (internal quotation marks omitted). The step towards completion of the crime must be more than mere preparation. Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Nonetheless, an individual accused of attempt to possess cocaine does not have to get very far along the line toward ultimate commission of the object crime in order to commit the attempt offense. United States v. Doyon, 194 F.3d 207, 211 (1st Cir. 1999). 12 A rational jury could have found easily that Burgos demonstrated an intent to commit the substantive offense of possessing cocaine with intent to distribute it. Law enforcement officers testified that Burgos arranged the transaction with O'Neil over the course of six telephone calls. Shortly before the agreed-upon meeting time, surveillance officers observed Burgos leave his home in a car, closely followed by an individual in another car. The drug agents testified that the presence of this second car was consistent with the practice of bringing security to a narcotics transaction. The officers then observed Burgos arrive at the location that he and O'Neil had specified carrying $44,000 in cash, a sum corresponding to the price and quantity of cocaine he had agreed to purchase - two kilograms at $22,000 each. Burgos approached O'Neil and was immediately arrested. This evidence establishes Burgos's criminal intent and further constitutes a substantial step towards commission of the substantive offense of possessing cocaine. Whether he or O'Neil did in fact possess cocaine at some point during the transaction is irrelevant.