Court Opinion

ID: 1000002
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:33:45.159589+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:53.398889
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 99-4098

ALBERT ANTHONY WHITE,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News.
Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-98-36)

Submitted: September 30, 1999

Decided: October 14, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and KING, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Stephen King Smith, Hampton, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F.
Fahey, United States Attorney, Kevin M. Comstock, Assistant United
States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Albert Anthony White appeals his convictions and sentence for
possession with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin in violation of
21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (1994). On appeal, White contends that: (1)
there was insufficient evidence to sustain his convictions; (2) the dis-
trict court abused its discretion in finding that the Government estab-
lished a chain of custody for the cocaine and heroin admitted at trial;
(3) the court erroneously found that White committed perjury and
provided false information to the probation officer and enhanced
White's sentence for obstruction of justice under U. S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual § 3C1.1 (1997). We have reviewed the parties'
briefs, the record, and the applicable law, and affirm.

We find that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to
the Government, there was sufficient evidence to sustain White's con-
victions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). See Glasser v. United States, 315
U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Although law enforcement officers did not find
items normally associated with distribution in White's possession at
the time of his arrest, the significant quantity of cocaine and heroin
they recovered permitted the inference that White possessed the nar-
cotics with an intent to distribute. See United States v. Fisher, 912
F.2d 728, 730 (4th Cir. 1990); see also United States v. Bell, 954 F.2d
232, 235 (4th Cir. 1992) (concluding that 13.5 grams of crack cocaine
was a sufficient quantity to support an inference of intent to distrib-
ute); United States v. Blake, 484 F.2d 50, 57-58 (8th Cir. 1973) (find-
ing that 14.3 grams of heroin with a street value of $4200 sufficient
to infer intent to distribute).

Furthermore, we find that the district court did not abuse its discre-
tion in finding that the Government established a legally sufficient
chain of custody for the authentication of the heroin and cocaine, and
therefore, the court did not err in admitting that evidence. See United
States v. Howard-Arias, 679 F.2d 363, 366 (4th Cir. 1982). We also
conclude that the court did not err in finding that White obstructed
justice by perjuring himself at trial and by providing false information

                     2
to the probation officer. Thus, the court properly enhanced White's
sentence based upon those findings. See USSG§ 3C1.1.

Accordingly, we affirm White's convictions and sentence. We dis-
pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and oral argu-
ment would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

                    3