Opinion ID: 627222
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Tobin

Text: During rebuttal argument, the government stated that the controlled substances at issue for Count 3 and Count 11 were dispensed by a company called Excelsior Pharmaceuticals. The government argued that employees of Excelsior were salaried and that as a result, they did not have tracking numbers for the orders. Tobin objected to this statement on the ground that the government was arguing facts not in evidence. The District Court overruled the objection, instructing the jury: it's up to you to recall the evidence [and to] rely upon your memory of the evidence. [If] counsel tells you something that you don't recall, you should rely upon your memory, not counsel's memory. Tobin asserts that the government's statement during closing argument requires his convictions to be reversed. According to Tobin, the government was attempting to explain the absence of tracking numbers in order to persuade the jury that the controlled substances were in fact shipped. Tobin's argument is unavailing because it rests on the assumption that the government was required to prove the actual shipment of the controlled substances in order to obtain a conviction under Section 841(a)(1). As we have explained, the CSA required the government only to show that Tobin made an  attempted transfer of a controlled substance. 21 U.S.C. § 802(8) (emphasis added). Thus, even if the government made an improper argument, Tobin has not shown that it affected his substantial rights.