Source: cases/21usc841/f3d-932-1091-us-v-mazzulla.case
Case source: https://www.neochart.com/catalog/cases/f3d/volume_932/1091_01/index.html
Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the government, we are satisfied that the evidence supports the verdict on every count.
casedsl 1.2
# author: Flash2 (gemini-3.8-flash-high)
# triaged-by: Fable (2026-11-10)
case /f3d/932/1091-01
name United States v. Mazzulla
cite 932 F.3d 1091 (2019)
court United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
date 2019-08-02
url catalog/cases/f3d/volume_932/1091_01/index.html
source ir/caselaw/f3d_932.jsonl sha1=3ffc53209ba6d5198323d4287b75bfaf0b959a45 chars=29375
opinion maj : majority by Erickson @0..29375 controlling
? opinion: the two paragraphs @29068..29375 are the opinion's own footnotes appended by the IR; one span.
law 21usc841 (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A),(b)(1)(B)
role applied
posture criminal; jury convictions for conspiracy (ยง 846), possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine (count II, 49 grams) and distribution / possession with intent (count V); appeal raises suppression, Franks, in camera review, Rule 403, refusal of a simple-possession lesser-included instruction, and a general sufficiency challenge; affirmed
result claimant-won
element intent-to-distribute : satisfied [proved]
route inferred-from-quantity-and-circumstances
pattern baggies-scale-and-witness-testimony
fact @4358..4486 [supports] | The officers searched the motor home and found approximately 49 grams of methamphetamine, a pistol, and some drug paraphernalia.
fact @2040..2179 [supports] | During the interview, Mazzulla admitted that over the past two years he sold up to two ounces of methamphetamine per week to his employees.
fact @11062..11248 [supports] | During the course of trial, several other witnesses testified about their drug-related interactions with Mazzulla, most of whom had bought various quantities of methamphetamine from him.
fact @1679..1814 [cuts-against] | During the meeting, Mazzulla admitted to possession of a personal quantity of methamphetamine and consented to a search of his vehicle.
held @28848..28985 | Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the government, we are satisfied that the evidence supports the verdict on every count.
gloss Sufficiency upheld on every count in one sentence; the court's actual discussion of intent to distribute is in its approval of the refusal to give a simple-possession instruction on count II (49 grams was more than a personal-use quantity, distribution paraphernalia, non-accomplice testimony of sales), reviewed for abuse of discretion.
? scope: the reasoned ruling on intent is the lesser-included-instruction ruling ("The court did not abuse its discretion in declining to give a simple possession instruction."), a procedural ruling; the merits holding recorded here is the global sufficiency sentence. The specific sufficiency argument on appeal went to the conspiracy count (witness credibility).
? polarity: the cuts-against fact is the 2015 stop (3.1 grams), not the count II seizure; it is the only personal-use fact in the opinion.
element possession : satisfied [proved]
decider jury
review none
route constructive
pattern residence-camper-and-vehicle-storage
fact @4239..4357 [supports] | The officers ordered the people to come out, and Mazzulla and a woman (later identified as Rhonda Meador) stepped out.
fact @4358..4486 [supports] | The officers searched the motor home and found approximately 49 grams of methamphetamine, a pistol, and some drug paraphernalia.
fact @5514..5711 [supports] | The search of the Folsom St. garage was done in the early morning of April 22 and resulted in seizure of 210 grams of methamphetamine found under the hood of Burke's green van parked in the garage.
gloss Jury finding only: possession was not separately contested or analysed on appeal (the conviction was affirmed by the global sufficiency sentence). Drugs were in the camper defendant had just stepped out of and, later, under the hood of a co-defendant's van in the garage where he lived.
? decider: the court's "evidence supports the verdict on every count" could be read as affirming this finding (review affirmed); recorded as unreviewed because possession is never discussed.