United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012-12-03
21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: criminal; jury conviction on two counts of possession of cocaine / cocaine base with intent to deliver; defendant appeals denial of suppression and sufficiency of evidence on constructive possession and intent to distribute; conviction affirmed, remanded for the district court to consider resentencing on the cocaine-base count under the Fair Sentencing Act (Dorsey); result: claimant-won; claim: (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A)(iii),(b)(1)(B)(ii)
Uncertainty
other: conviction affirmed on every § 841(a)(1) element; only the § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii) mandatory-minimum tier for the cocaine-base count is left open on remand (see the quantity block)
Element knowledge: holding: the opinion treats knowledge inside its constructive-possession discussion (the defendant framed his challenge as possession and intent), not as a separately argued element
Element quantity: route: no route covers which version of the threshold table applies in time (Fair Sentencing Act retroactivity)
Misfit
None recorded
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 18
Elements 7–12 of 18
| Case | Death or serious bodily injury results from the use of such substance (§ 841(b)(1)(A)-(C) 20-year mandatory minimum) | Recidivist enhancement for prior conviction for a serious drug felony or serious violent felony (§ 841(b)(1), 21 U.S.C. § 851) | Prohibited act under § 841(a)(1): manufacture, distribute, or dispense | Cross-statute route alias: see separate aiding-abetting (§ 2) and x-conspiracy-846 (§ 846) routes | Aiding and abetting route under 18 U.S.C. § 2 (cross-statute) | Categorical / modified categorical comparison of state drug offense to 21 U.S.C. § 841 (INA / ACCA / Guidelines) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Orozco — 700 F.3d 1176 (2012) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012 (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 13–18 of 18
| Case | Drug conspiracy route under 21 U.S.C. § 846 (cross-statute) | Fifth Amendment Due Process / Equal Protection challenge to carrier-medium weight sentencing (Chapman) | Affirmative defense of entrapment (government inducement + lack of predisposition) | Rule of lenity in construing ambiguous penalty provisions of § 841(b) | Fifth Amendment void-for-vagueness challenge to "mixture or substance" or analogue provisions | Continuing-offense venue for § 841(a)(1) possession with intent to distribute / distribution (18 U.S.C. § 3237(a)) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Orozco — 700 F.3d 1176 (2012) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012 (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Orozco — 700 F.3d 1176 (2012) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012 — satisfied · proved (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Specific intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense the possessed controlled substance | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; claim: (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A)(iii),(b)(1)(B)(ii) 2.8 kilograms of powder cocaine, 55 grams of cocaine base, and $1.4 million in cash established intent to distribute. | sixty-two-bundles-powder-and-base-cocaine | A. later, more thorough search revealed 62 cellophane-wrapped bundles containing approximately $1.4 million (primarily in $20 bills), 2.8 kilograms of powder cocaine, and slightly over 55 grams of cocaine base.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [2621:2831] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.“A large quantity of drugs ... is sufficient evidence of ... intent to distribute.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [7949:8032] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.Finally, the large quantity of drugs and money are sufficient to support an inference of intent to distribute.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [7802:7912] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221. |
| United States v. Orozco — 700 F.3d 1176 (2012) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012 — satisfied · proved (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Mens rea: "knowingly or intentionally" (including knowledge that the substance is a controlled substance) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; claim: (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A)(iii),(b)(1)(B)(ii) Expert testimony that so much money and cocaine would not be entrusted to an unknowing occupant, plus flight during the search, supported the finding that the co-driver knew of the hidden contraband. | high-value-contraband-entrusted-to-driver-and-flight | At trial, an expert testified that it was extremely unlikely that such a large quantity of money and drugs would be placed in a vehicle without the occupant’s knowledge.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [6272:6441] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.While the trooper was conducting the search, Orozco and the other driver fled on foot.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [2491:2577] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.Although Orozco presents what he characterizes as noninculpatory explanations for the log-book inconsistencies and his flight, the jury rejected his arguments, and we may not second-guess the jury’s determinations.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [7332:7546] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221. |
| United States v. Orozco — 700 F.3d 1176 (2012) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012 — satisfied · proved (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Possession (actual, constructive, sole, or joint dominion and control) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; claim: (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A)(iii),(b)(1)(B)(ii) Status as one of two drivers of the commercial truck, log-book discrepancies and flight during the search supported constructive possession of contraband hidden behind a light cover; the argument that only the other driver possessed it was for the jury, which rejected it. | co-driver-of-commercial-truck-hidden-compartment-behind-light-cover | Orozco and another driver were driving a commercial truck with an empty flatbed trailer through Missouri.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [1280:1385] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.When searching the vehicle, the trooper noticed stripped screws on a light cover, removed the screws, and discovered concealed bundles.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [2355:2490] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.When Orozco was in a sleeping berth and the other driver was operating the vehicle, a commercial vehicle officer (“officer”) stopped the truck.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [1386:1529] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.“[PJresenee in a vehicle containing contraband ... and other evidence can give rise to an inference of control.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [6864:6976] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.Further, Orozco’s log book discrepancies, his flight from the scene, and the simple fact that he was a driver of the vehicle, taken together, are more than sufficient to support the verdict.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [6657:6847] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221. |
| United States v. Orozco — 700 F.3d 1176 (2012) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012 — not reached (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Partial penalty-tier drug type and quantity table (selected § 841(b)(1)(A)-(D) hook) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts rule-announced / merits claim: (a)(1) & (b)(1)(A)(iii),(b)(1)(B)(ii); count: Count 2, possession with intent to deliver cocaine base, § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii); subject: count=Count 2, possession with intent to deliver cocaine base, § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii) The amount (slightly over 55 g of cocaine base) was not disputed; what is open is which threshold table governs the § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii) ten-year minimum after the Fair Sentencing Act and Dorsey. The court did not decide it and remanded. | cocaine-base-55-grams-between-old-50g-and-new-280g-threshold | The Act, however, raised the threshold quantity of cocaine base for a ten-year statutory minimum sentence from 50 grams to 280 grams.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [8585:8718] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221.Given the drug quantities at issue, it appears Orozco may be entitled to the benefit of the Act.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_700.jsonl#/f3d/700/1176-01; Unicode character offsets [9611:9707] (end exclusive); SHA-256 1ed81bd08c0093a17b515cc116baeade283f512a2591b1c8bd38b0e53e86d221. |