United States v. Boykin

Defendant was convicted of five counts of distribution of methamphetamine, one count of distribution of cocaine, and one count of conspiracy to distribute. On appeal, defendant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence on Count Six, one of the counts for distribution and challenged his sentence. The court found that the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of Count Six where there was sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find that defendant aided and abetted the distribution of methamphetamine. The court concluded that the district court did not clearly err by not finding the FBI memo at issue to be a basis for a charge of sentencing manipulation. Although the court is deeply troubled by the participation of a law enforcement officer, the investigation fell just shy of constituting outrageous government conduct. Here, there was evidence that the government extended its investigation to build a stronger case against defendant. Of particular concern was that the government’s first two confidential sources were both convicted of serious offenses during the period they were acting as confidential sources against defendant. Thus, it was reasonable for law enforcement to extend the investigation with more controlled purchases by a more credible confidential source. Further, the existence of the FBI memo did not require the district court to conclude that the investigators extended the investigation solely to enhance defendant’s potential sentence. The court also concluded that it was not an abuse of discretion for the court to determine these incidents were properly calculated in determining defendant’s criminal history. Finally, the district court did not err in applying a two-level sentencing enhancement for firearm possession and the court rejected defendant's argument that the drug quantity attributed to him was unforeseeable. Accordingly, the court affirmed the sentence. View "United States v. Boykin" on Justia Law