Opinion ID: 517661
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Harper's Participation in a Single Conspiracy

Text: 99 Harper contends, as does Grier, that the evidence does not establish a single wheel conspiracy and argues that there is no evidence linking Harper to any of the other defendants. According to Harper the evidence, at best, showed Pipito had his own little conspiracy with Harper and with each co-defendant. However, as we made clear in our discussion of the Grier evidence, there is sufficient evidence to convict one of a single conspiracy if the evidence establishes that the individual is aware of the essential features and broad scope of the conspiracy and that the co-conspirators are united in a common single goal. Blumenthal, 332 U.S. at 558, 68 S.Ct. at 257. The individual co-conspirator need not know the other parties involved in the conspiracy, he must only know that other people are involved. Boucher, 796 F.2d at 975. 100 The evidence at trial established that Harper was more than an occasional purchaser of drugs for personal use. The government introduced eight recordings of intercepted phone conversations between Harper and/or his wife and Pipito. In one of these conversations (on November 6, 1984) the following dialogue occurred: 101 HARPER: So I really don't want to keep you on hold, you know. Things are slow, but fuck it, it don't make no difference, you know. 102 PIPITO: Uh, hm. 103 HARPER: O.K.? 104 PIPITO: All right, you want me to bring anything, or. 105 HARPER: Just one, you know. 106 PIPITO: All right. 107 (Emphasis added). Later that same day Pipito phoned the Harper residence and talked to Mrs. (Louise) Harper. Pipito said he had something comin' in Friday and that he wanted to speak with Harper about it. 108 On November 26, 1984, Pipito, after his return from Florida, again called Harper and told him that he had been trying to get hold of him all day Saturday (November 24). Harper said that he was starvin' to death and it was agreed that Pipito would bring a couple of things to show Harper so he could decide. During the conversation Harper expressed his concern that Pipito had not contacted him sooner because Pipito was supposed to contact [him] the time you got it back. (Emphasis added). Later that same morning defendant Harper called Pipito and it was agreed that Harper would call Pipito later so that they could work out some kind of a plan. That afternoon Harper called Pipito to tell him that he was home, and Pipito replied that he was on his way. 109 Harper's status as more than an occasional purchaser of drugs was confirmed by the search of Harper's residence on the evening of November 30, 1984. The Country Time lemonade can was seized, and a DEA chemist testified that the white powdery substance found within double plastic bags in the lemonade can amounted to 35.46 grams (approximately one and one-quarter ounces) of 49 percent pure cocaine. A DEA agent qualified as an expert in the drug trafficking field testified that he would not expect to see as much as an ounce of cocaine in the hands of one individual consumer. Also found during the search was a scale and a plate, both of which had traces of cocaine upon them. In another area of the residence, a dial-o-gram scale was also found. The DEA expert testified that drug traffickers use dial-o-gram scales to package drugs because that type of scale lends itself more readily to somewhat larger quantities than smaller quantities. Also discovered during the search were three revolvers, two of which were loaded and a piece of paper containing drug-related phrases. 110 Finally, a page of a notebook was found during the search of the co-defendant Jackson's residence on which the name Harper was written followed by the phone number of the Isaac Harper residence. Both at trial and on appeal Harper argued that the note was inadmissible since it lacked relevance and was without probative value. The district court judge ruled, after legal argument outside the presence of the jury, that the note was admissible. His decision is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. See, e.g., United States v. Davis, 838 F.2d 909, 914 (7th Cir.1988). Federal Rule of Evidence 402 states that [a]ll relevant evidence is admissible.  'Relevant evidence' means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable than it would be without the evidence. Rule 401, Fed.R.Evid. It is undeniable that a note with Harper's name and phone number on it, found in the apartment of an alleged co-conspirator, is relevant evidence as it tends to make Harper's involvement in the conspiracy more probable than it would be in the absence of the evidence. See id. This case is not one like United States v. Bentvena, 319 F.2d 916, 949 (2d Cir.1963), in which the involved notebook page was the sole independent evidence connecting the defendant with the conspiracy. The page from the notebook, while not alone sufficient to convict Harper of membership in the conspiracy, is also relevant evidence, albeit circumstantial, establishing that Harper was participating in the conspiracy and aware of its magnitude. As we noted, supra, at 923: Not only is the use of circumstantial evidence permissible, but 'circumstantial evidence may be the sole support for a conviction. '  Nesbitt, 852 F.2d at 1510 (quoting United States v. Williams, 798 F.2d 1024, 1042 (7th Cir.1986) (dissenting opinion) which quoted, in turn, United States v. McCrady, 774 F.2d 868, 874 (8th Cir.1985)). 111 For the reasons detailed, based on the totality of the evidence introduced against Harper, a jury could and did find that Harper knowingly and willingly participated in a single conspiracy with others which had Pipito as its kingpin. The contents of the telephone calls between Harper and Pipito demonstrate a close personal relationship with Pipito and a knowledge that Pipito was receiving drugs from others in what the jury could very logically infer was a large-scale drug distribution enterprise. The calls further reflected a knowing and expectant waiting for the delivery of drugs by others in the conspiracy. Moreover, the large amount of cocaine found in the search of Harper's residence, combined with the dial-o-gram scale, the scale and plate with cocaine traces, and loaded guns all point toward Harper's obvious personal involvement in the conspiracy. The addition of the piece of paper with Harper's name and phone number on it, which was found in the residence of another co-conspirator, further bolsters the finding of Harper's involvement in the conspiracy which flowed from the other pieces of evidence. Based on all this evidence the jury reasonably found that the common goal of the conspiracy in this case was to distribute cocaine for profit. A rational jury could and did infer, based on the evidence and its exercise of its collective common sense, that each co-conspirator, including Harper, was a knowledgeable and important member participating in a large-scale drug distribution enterprise, and we confirm that portion of the jury verdict convicting Harper of membership in a single conspiracy. 112