United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999-05-10
21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: criminal; jury conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base and marijuana; defendant challenges sufficiency of evidence on knowing constructive possession and intent to distribute; convictions affirmed; result: claimant-won; claim: (a)(1)
Uncertainty
Element knowledge: holding: knowledge is not decided in a sentence of its own; it is folded into the constructive-possession nexus holding
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. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 (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. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 (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. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — satisfied · conceded (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: conceded; claim: (a)(1); count: Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base On appeal the defendant admitted that the quantity of cocaine base seized "would be more than adequate to sustain a conviction for possession with intent to distribute" and disputed only knowing possession. | conceded-on-quantity-plus-controlled-buy | The informant utilized by police for a controlled buy also told officers that she had purchased crack cocaine from an individual named Loc, which is Defendant’s nickname.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [21382:21552] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |
| United States v. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — 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); count: Possession with intent to distribute marijuana; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute marijuana A buyer's statement that he bought marijuana at the residence, distribution quantities, and cash with marked buy money supported intent to distribute; the defendant argued the marijuana was scattered about the residence and showed only personal use, and that the co-defendant was convicted only of simple possession on the same evidence. | buyer-statement-quantity-and-cash | Officer Easter testified that he saw some individuals approach Ms. Payne’s residence and that they left the residence shortly thereafter.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [23841:23978] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.He testified further that, in response to his subsequent questioning, one of those individuals told Officer Easter that he had purchased marijuana at the residence in question.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [23979:24155] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.The record also reveals that sufficient quantities of marijuana were located in the residence for the jury to infer that it was used for distribution rather than for personal use.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [24420:24599] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.This evidence reasonably supports the jury’s conclusion that Defendant knowingly possessed marijuana with intent to distribute it.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [25041:25171] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |
| United States v. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — 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); count: Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base On the cocaine-base count the defendant disputed only "knowing possession". The court resolved knowledge inside its constructive-possession (nexus) analysis; the deciding sentence is the held line of the possession block. | escorting-visitors-to-backyard-stash-and-regular-overnight-stays | However, the officer who observed the residence prior to obtaining and executing the search warrant testified at trial that on two occasions he saw people walking up to the house and then saw Defendant walk out the front door and towards the backyard with them.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [21120:21381] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.Although Defendant may not have resided at Ms. Payne’s residence on a full-time basis, the record indicates that his girlfriend and daughter both lived there and that he stayed there three to four nights a week.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [19888:20099] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.Because Defendant did not have actual possession of the cocaine base at the time of the search, we must determine whether he constructively possessed the drugs by virtue of his knowing ownership, dominion, or control over Ms. Payne’s residence and the drugs.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [19629:19887] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |
| United States v. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — 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); count: Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base Key to residence in pocket, mail at address, regular overnight stays, marked buy money in nightstand, and surveillance of defendant walking visitors toward the backyard stash hole established constructive possession of cocaine base, despite third-party access to the yard. | backyard-stash-hole-and-nightstand-stash | Further, on the day of the search, officers discovered a single key in Defendant’s coat pocket which fit the front door lock of Ms. Payne’s residence. Officers also discovered mail addressed to Defendant at Ms. Payne’s address.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [20355:20582] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.They also found a plastic bag containing crack cocaine in a hole covered with a piece of particle board in the middle of the backyard of the residence.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [3053:3204] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.Further, a marked twenty-dollar bill used by the informant to purchase cocaine base from Defendant was found with approximately $3,000 in cash and some cocaine base in a night stand next to the bed in which Defendant was lying when officers executed the warrant.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [21553:21815] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.There is a four-foot fence .surrounding the backyard of the residence, and a fraternity house is located directly behind the fence.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [3205:3336] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.“Constructive possession occurs when a person ‘knowingly has ownership, dominion or control over the narcotics and the premises where the narcotics are found.’ ”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [18913:19074] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.We conclude that the evidence establishes a sufficient nexus between Defendant and the cocaine base for a jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant constructively possessed the cocaine base with intent to distribute it.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [22096:22331] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |
| United States v. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — 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); count: Possession with intent to distribute marijuana; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute marijuana Dominion over the residence and the bedroom containing marijuana and cash supported constructive possession of marijuana, although the co-defendant claimed some of it as hers. | marijuana-throughout-bedroom-where-defendant-found | In a night stand next to the bed, officers found marijuana, approximately $8,000 in cash which included a marked twenty-dollar bill used by a police informant to purchase cocaine base from Defendant, and two clear bags containing crack cocaine.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [2044:2288] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.For example, officers discovered marijuana throughout the room where Defendant was found, including in the night stand where they located the $3,000 in cash, the marked twenty-dollar bill, and some cocaine base.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [23508:23719] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.Further, although Ms. Payne testified that some of the marijuana found in the residence was hers, she stated that not all of it was.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [24600:24732] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8.The evidence also shows a sufficient nexus between Defendant and the marijuana for the jury to conclude that he constructively possessed it.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [23367:23507] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |
| United States v. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — satisfied · conceded (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Controlled substance (21 U.S.C. §§ 802(6), 812 Schedules I-V) or counterfeit substance (§ 841(a)(2)) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1); count: Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base Identity of the substance was not disputed. | crack-cocaine-identity-undisputed | In addition, officers found a plastic bag containing cocaine base and marijuana cigarettes on top of a dresser, two small bags of marijuana on top of a large glass fish tank, and another plastic bag containing'butts of marijuana cigarettes in a closet in the bedroom.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [2500:2767] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |
| United States v. Jenkins — 175 F.3d 1208 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999 — satisfied · conceded (21usc841: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Controlled substance (21 U.S.C. §§ 802(6), 812 Schedules I-V) or counterfeit substance (§ 841(a)(2)) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1); count: Possession with intent to distribute marijuana; subject: count=Possession with intent to distribute marijuana Identity of the substance was not disputed. | marijuana-identity-undisputed | Officers also discovered marijuana and roach clips in a cigar box, plastic sandwich bags, marijuana in a laundry basket, and $203 in cash and Ms. Payne’s driver’s license in a pocket of a pair of women’s jeans.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_175.jsonl#/f3d/175/1208-01; Unicode character offsets [2289:2499] (end exclusive); SHA-256 be157a8f1cee3b5329a7d7b0bd0c99dcbde82f86a2379b654c059d9c5b407ed8. |