Opinion ID: 792738
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Sufficiency of the evidence as to Coleman

Text: 35 Coleman also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to convict him of conspiracy and attempt to possess cocaine with intent to distribute. The government argues as a threshold matter that Coleman has not properly raised this issue because he never filed a Rule 29 motion challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and because his opening appellate brief did not mention the attempted possession charge. But Coleman did file a motion for a new trial in which he said the government failed to prove both the conspiracy and attempted possession charges; the fact that he did not specifically cite FED. R. CRIM. P. 29 in his motion makes no difference. See South, 28 F.3d at 627 (defendant's motion need only put the government on notice that he is challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions). Coleman's motion provided adequate notice of his sufficiency of the evidence challenge. The government's second argument—that Coleman did not mention the attempted possession count in his opening appellate brief—is simply mistaken. Coleman's brief plainly states: the government failed to convict Defendant Jerome Coleman of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute or attempted possession of cocaine with intent to distribute.  (Emphasis added.) We proceed to the merits of Coleman's appeal. 36 Coleman's lone argument is that the government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew there would be illegal drugs present during the June 6, 2003 theft. But the pretheft conversation between Polk, Grady, and Coleman—even more so than the pretheft conversation between Polk and Brown—sufficiently established Coleman's knowledge that the proposed scheme involved drugs as well as money. During that conversation, a few hours before the theft, Polk specifically told Grady and Coleman there would be cocaine in the target car: [M]y guy say there's gonna be some coke in there. So it'll probably be like, a, uh, a brick. Polk said the coke would go to his guy and the three of them would split up the money. 37 Polk and Agent Evans testified that the sham cocaine in the June 6 theft—like that in the June 27 theft—resembled a typical kilogram package of cocaine. After stealing the money and fake drugs, Polk told Coleman and Grady that he would give his man the coke. This evidence amply supports the jury's verdicts on the two drug-related counts against Coleman.