Opinion ID: 2978408
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: When reviewing a defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, a court must determine “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.” United States v. Jones, 102 F.3d 804, 807 (6th Cir. 1996). The credibility, or lack thereof, of the witnesses for the prosecution is not a ground for challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. United States v. Paige, 470 F.3d 603, 608 (6th Cir. 2006). Young did not make a motion for an acquittal at any point during the trial. Therefore, the court should “reverse his conviction only if the record is ‘devoid of evidence pointing to guilt,’ such that a manifest miscarriage of justice occurred.” United States v. Vasquez, 560 F.3d 461, 469 (6th Cir. 2009). Young was convicted of conspiracy to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. A conspiracy to distribute drugs requires “(1) an agreement to violate the drug laws, and (2) each conspirator's knowledge of, intent to join, and participation in the conspiracy.” United States v. Crozier, 259 F.3d 503, 517 (6th Cir. 2001). A conspiracy can be inferred from evidence of repeat purchases and from the amount of drugs involved. United States v. Martinez, 430 F.3d 317, 333 (6th Cir. 2005). The record is not devoid of evidence against Young. Story identified Young as his source for cocaine in South Carolina. Story testified that they would get drugs from Young “three or four times a week” and that they would get “9 ounces to 18 ounces.” Further, Young’s voice was -9- Nos. 07-6493, 08-5315, 08-5422 United States v. Young, et al. identified on several phone calls discussing arrangements for drug purchases. To the extent that Young argues there should be more evidence against him or that Story was not a credible witness, he does not raise issues that are cognizable in this sufficiency challenge. So long as there was some evidence supporting the conviction, we cannot find that it was a manifest miscarriage of justice.