Opinion ID: 2973072
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Smith’s Appeal of His Conviction

Text: Smith contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conspiracy and firearm convictions. He concedes that he was part of a gang that distributed drugs, that he bought a small quantity of cocaine from the gang, and that he was caught on videotape discussing “pat down” procedures at the gang’s headquarters. But he asserts that the evidence was insufficient to show that, even if he did sell some drugs, the sales were part of the drug-trafficking conspiracy. He also denies that he was involved in the discharge of a firearm, or that the firearm was discharged in connection with drug trafficking. In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, the court determines whether “after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Avery, 128 F.3d 966, 971 (6th Cir. 1997) (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979)). To be found guilty on a charge of conspiracy to engage in drug trafficking, a defendant must be aware of the object of the conspiracy and voluntarily associate himself with its purpose. United States v. Harris, 397 F.3d 404, 414 (6th Cir. 2005). -7- Nos. 04-5677/04-5704/04-5678 United States v. Williams Mere presence is not enough to connect a person to a conspiracy. However, once the existence of a conspiracy was established, only slight evidence was needed to connect [defendant] to it, if there was sufficient evidence to establish the connection beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Braggs, 23 F.3d 1047, 1051 (6th Cir. 1994); see also Gibbs, 182 F.3d at 422 (citing United States v. Pearce, 912 F.2d 159, 162 (6th Cir. 1990)). In our view, the evidence that defendant shot Terry Moore as part of an effort to collect a drug debt is sufficient to sustain both convictions. Two witnesses testified that Smith, Howell, and Brown discussed their intention to collect a debt from a drug-trafficking transaction on their way to meeting Moore. Thus, there was evidence that defendant was aware of the drug-trafficking conspiracy and voluntarily associated himself with the drug-trafficking objective. Although defendant questions the credibility of the witnesses, that credibility determination is left to the jury. Moreover, in addition to the facts admitted by defendant, there was also evidence that he served as the “look out” in a failed “hit” upon Benton for being an informant, and that he instructed a fellow inmate not to reveal that the shooting of Terry Moore was drug-related. In short, a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant conspired to distribute fifty or more grams of cocaine. The evidence that defendant shot Moore supports the firearm charge as well. In order to be found guilty of the firearm charge, the weapon must facilitate or have the potential to facilitate a drug-trafficking offense. Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223, 238 (1993) (citing United States v. Stewart, 779 F.2d 538, 539 (9th Cir. 1985)); United States v. Warwick, 167 F.3d 965, 971 (6th Cir. 1999). Since testimony showed that defendant shot Moore while collecting a debt for drug sales, -8- Nos. 04-5677/04-5704/04-5678 United States v. Williams the use of a weapon facilitated drug trafficking. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the jury’s verdict.