Court Opinion

ID: 9400698
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-08 21:01:00.826992+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:47.372903
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-4472      Doc: 30         Filed: 06/07/2023     Pg: 1 of 3

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-4472

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        TIMOTHY WAYNE DODD,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
        Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (2:21-cr-00171-2)

        Submitted: April 28, 2023                                             Decided: June 7, 2023

        Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: David Schles, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID SCHLES, Charleston, West
        Virginia, for Appellant. William S. Thompson, United States Attorney, Joshua C. Hanks,
        Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
        Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4472      Doc: 30          Filed: 06/07/2023     Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Timothy Dodd was convicted by a jury of conspiring to distribute 500 grams or

        more of a substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. 21 U.S.C.

        § 841(a)(1). Seeing no reversible error, we affirm.

               At trial, Dodd objected to the government’s presentation of two recorded phone calls

        he made from jail following his arrest. In the calls, Dodd’s girlfriend, Emilee Sampson,

        offered to “make sure that like 2 or 3 people have something so you will have a little bit of

        money coming in,” and Dodd confirmed those sales should result in about $2,400 per week

        or “$10 grand a month.” JA 498–99. Dodd argued the calls could not be used as evidence

        of the charged conspiracy, because the calls took place after the indictment asserts the

        charged conspiracy ended. The district court admitted the calls, citing United States v. Reid,

        523 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2008), for the proposition that “evidence of continuing relationships

        and repeated transactions can support a finding that there was a conspiracy, especially

        when coupled with substantial quantities of drugs.” JA 260–61.

               The district court also denied Dodd’s motion for a judgment of acquittal, stating

        there was “overwhelming evidence to take this matter to the jury.” JA 406.

               We review the denial of a Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal de novo,

        upsetting a conviction “only where no reasonable juror could have found the essential

        elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Dennis, 19 F.4th 656,

        666 (4th Cir. 2021) (quotation marks omitted). We review the evidentiary ruling for an

        abuse of discretion and do not disturb even an erroneous ruling if it was harmless.

        See United States v. Brizuela, 962 F.3d 784, 791, 797 (4th Cir. 2020).

                                                      2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4472         Doc: 30     Filed: 06/07/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

              Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient

        to support the jury’s verdict and that the district court committed no reversible error in

        admitting the challenged evidence. We thus affirm.

              We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

        adequately presented in the materials before this Court, and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                     AFFIRMED

                                                    3