The defendants are appealing a conviction that stems from a multi-count indictment. The first defendant appeals his conviction and sentence to life in prison for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute 100 kg or less of marijuana (marijuana possession), and between 500 grams and 5 kilograms of cocaine, distribution of marijuana, and use of a communication facility to commission drug trafficking, and being felon in possession of a firearm.
The second defendant appeals her convictions of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or less of marijuana, and use of a communication facility to run a felony drug trafficking crime ring.
Arguments for Appeal
A New York Criminal Lawyer said the male defendant argues that the district court made an error when trying him and the other defendant together. He also states the court made an error by allowing a drug lab report to be admitted into evidence without testimony from the lab technician and further argues that the court erred in determining that there was sufficient evidence to support his conviction for conspiracy. The male defendant argues that he should not have been convicted as a career offender and that his sentence should not have been enhanced.
The female defendant argues that the district court erred by denying her motion to suppress evidence that was taken from her mobile home because the search warrant lacked probable cause and did not specifically identify her mobile home.
Case Background
A Staten Island Criminal Lawyer said the indictments against the defendants stem from a large scale drug distribution enterprise. There were a total of 33 individuals that were indicted as a result of this drug enterprise. One of the others that were involved testified against the two defendants. He stated that he had purchased both marijuana and cocaine from both of them.
The government executed search warrants of the defendant’s properties after obtaining probable cause to believe that they were both involved in drug trafficking. In the home of the male defendant they found several firearms. Throughout the entire property that is owned by both of the defendants they found almost $130,000 in cash, many firearms, and 18 kilograms of cocaine and 85 pounds of marijuana.
Case Discussion and Decision
In regard to the male defendant’s argument that he should have been tried separately he has failed to show that being tried with the other defendant deprived him of a fair trial. It is common for defendants who are indicted together to be tried together, especially in cases of conspiracy. The court also finds that there is sufficient evidence provided to support the conspiracy charge.
A New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said that in regard to the argument about the career criminal charge, it is found that the defendant had previously been convicted of a crime that qualifies for the purpose of this enhancement. There is no error found in regard to the conviction or sentencing of the male defendant.
The female defendant argues that evidence from her mobile home should have been suppressed. However, the warrant does specifically cover her home and for this reason the court was correct in allowing the evidence to be introduced in the case.
All of the convictions and sentences in this case are affirmed.
Stephen Bilkis & Associates has law offices in New York City. If you need to speak with a lawyer regarding any legal issue that you have, contact one of our offices to set up an appointment for a free consultation.