Opinion ID: 2658283
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Kendrick Tyshawn Akins

Text: Akins challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s finding both that he was a knowing member of the conspiracy and that he is responsible for five kilograms or more of powder cocaine. He does not challenge the jury’s finding that he is responsible for 50 grams or more of crack cocaine. 20 Case: 12-40515 Document: 00512575405 Page: 21 Date Filed: 03/27/2014 No. 12-40515 Evidence from wiretapped calls supports the jury’s determination that Akins was a member of the conspiracy. The calls are too numerous to list here. As an example, Akins and Shawn Perkins accounted for drugs and money on an intercepted call on December 1, 2008. Akins asked Shawn Perkins, “How much of that work you got left?” and Perkins replied, “About almost three ounces. Two ounces for sure. Something like that.” Perkins asked, “You want me to split that up? If you’re gonna come back Tuesday, you can probably just leave Marco some or something.” Akins asked, “I’m saying do I need to do that other one?” and Perkins replied, “[Expletive] no, I don’t think there’s gonna be till Monday or Tuesday.” In another example, on December 9, Perkins told Edwards that he was “gonna send Kendrick [Akins]” over and directed Edwards to “hand him two of mine.” Shortly before Akins returned with the drugs, he said, “he gave me a biat though–I can’t really tell what yours is–yours looks like it may be a nine.” The record shows many similar calls, and sufficiently supports the jury’s conviction. Akins also argues that the evidence does not support the jury’s finding that he is responsible for five kilograms or more of powder cocaine. The jury found Akins, along with his co-defendants, guilty of Count 1 of the Superseding Indictment, which charged a conspiracy to manufacture or distribute or intent to manufacture or distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine, 50 grams or more of crack cocaine, and 1000 kilograms or more of marijuana. Then, pursuant to a special verdict form, the jury was instructed to “determine the quantity of cocaine, cocaine base (crack) and/or marijuana attributable to each defendant found guilty of Count One.” The jury determined that Akins was responsible for five kilograms or more of cocaine, 50 grams or more of crack, and less than 50 kilograms of marijuana. The Government’s burden at trial was to prove the existence of a conspiracy, Akin’s involvement in it, and the requisite drug quantity involved in 21 Case: 12-40515 Document: 00512575405 Page: 22 Date Filed: 03/27/2014 No. 12-40515 the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.33 This Court has explained that even post-Apprendi,34 the burden does not extend to the “individualized question of what drug quantity was attributable” to a particular defendant as a coconspirator.35 The Government “need only allege and prove to the jury the bare facts necessary to increase the statutory sentencing maximum for the conspiracy as a whole.”36 Of course, a “defendant will not necessarily be held responsible for the full amount of drugs involved in the conspiracy,” but rather only “those amounts of drugs that he knew or reasonably could have known or believed were involved in the conspiracy,” considering “the co-conspirator’s role in the conspiracy, his relationship to the other conspirators, and any other information with ‘sufficient indicia of reliability.’”37 Here, the jury determined that the conspiracy as a whole involved more than five kilograms of powder cocaine, and confirmed via the special verdict form that Akins is responsible for this entire amount as a member of the conspiracy. The substantial evidence showing Akins’ active and knowing role in the conspiracy leaves us no reason to disrupt this determination. That the evidence shows Akins’s direct dealings focused on crack cocaine38 does not, in light of his substantial role in the conspiracy and his relationship to the other co- 33 See United States v. Turner, 319 F.3d 716, 721 (5th Cir. 2003). 34 Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). 35 See Turner, 319 F.3d at 722. 36 Id. (quoting Derman v. United States, 298 F.3d 34, 42–43 (1st Cir. 2002)). 37 United States v. Brito, 136 F.3d 397, 415 (5th Cir. 1998) (quoting United States v. Puig-Infante, 19 F.3d 929, 942 (5th Cir. 1994)). 38 Evidence also indicated that Akins had at least some direct dealings in powder cocaine as part of the drug distribution conspiracy. Trentargus Holt, a cocaine dealer and cooperating witness, testified that he bought half an ounce to an ounce of powder cocaine a couple of time per week from Akins from the early part of 2006 to that summer. 22 Case: 12-40515 Document: 00512575405 Page: 23 Date Filed: 03/27/2014 No. 12-40515 conspirators, absolve him of responsibility for the conspiracy’s foreseeable distribution of powder cocaine.