Opinion ID: 700654
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: analysis

Text: 6 In reviewing a claim of insufficiency of the evidence, the court must consider the evidence, including all possible inferences, in the light most favorable to the government; the verdict should be reversed only if the record contains no evidence from which the jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); United States v. Herrera-Rivera, 25 F.3d 491, 498 (7th Cir.1994). 7 The evidence is more than strong enough to support a guilty verdict. The jury was entitled to believe the testimony of Bruce Ramsey, Annetta Henderson, Brian Tucker, Phillip Davis, Troy Daniels, Michelle Wilson, Alfred Williams, Shelley Tucker, and Chuck Purdiman. United States v. McFarland, 37 F.3d 1235 (7th Cir.1994). A conspiracy consists of a combination or confederation of two or more persons formed for the purpose of committing by their joint efforts, a criminal act. United States v. Mealy, 851 F.2d 890, 895 (7th Cir.1988). There was testimony sufficient to establish such a conspiracy. 8 Williams' reliance on United States v. Townsend, 924 F.2d 1385 (7th Cir.1991), is off target. [T]he government doesn't have to prove with whom a defendant conspired; it need only prove that the defendant joined the agreement alleged, not the group. Id. at 1389. Conspiracies, like other crimes, may be proved entirely by circumstantial evidence. Id. at 1390. Even if, as Williams claims, one can infer from the evidence that there were multiple conspiracies, rather than the single conspiracy charged in the indictment, [t]he jury gets first crack at deciding 'whether there is one conspiracy or several when the possibility of a variance appears.'  United States v. Paiz, 905 F.2d 1014, 1019 (7th Cir.1990) (quoting United States v. Percival, 756 F.2d 600, 609 (7th Cir.1985)). Townsend, which focused on the problems of finding a conspiracy from a mere buyer-seller relationship in a trial of multiple alleged co-conspirators, is inapplicable here: Williams was tried alone and there was testimony that he was in a long-time partnership with another distributor, Lampkins, as well as testimony that Williams arranged drug distribution with numerous runners. This was enough evidence for the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of one conspiracy. 9 The judgment is AFFIRMED.