United States v. Santo Coleman , 336 F. App'x 936 ( 2009 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 08-15500 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JULY 14, 2009
Non-Argument Calendar
THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 06-00215-CR-F-N
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SANTO COLEMAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Alabama
_________________________
(July 14, 2009)
Before BLACK, BARKETT and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Santo Coleman appeals his conviction for conspiracy to distribute and
possess with intent to distribute cocaine. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846. Coleman
argues that the government failed to prove he reached an agreement with his
codefendants or that he knew of an agreement to possess or distribute drugs. We
affirm.
We review de novo the denial of a judgment of acquittal. United States v.
Garcia, 405 F.3d 1260, 1269 (11th Cir. 2005). To prove a conspiracy, the
government must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
“knowingly and voluntarily participated” in an agreement between himself and at
least one other person to commit a crime. United States v. Arbane, 446 F.3d 1223,
1228 (11th Cir. 2006). The government is not bound to introduce direct evidence,
and may instead prove its case through circumstantial evidence, “including
inferences from the conduct of the alleged participants or from circumstantial
evidence of a scheme[,]’” Garcia, 405 F.3d at 1270 (quoting United States v.
Rodriguez, 765 F.2d 1546, 1551 (11th Cir. 1985)), and “acts committed by the
defendant which furthered the purpose of the conspiracy.” United States v. Vera,
701 F.2d 1349, 1357 (11th Cir. 1983).
The district court did not err by denying Coleman’s motion for a judgment
of acquittal. The evidence established that Coleman met with different members of
the conspiracy, including Ricardo Enriquez and Harry Edwards Jones, in
2
Montgomery, Alabama, on two occasions during which Enriquez and a fourth
member of the conspiracy, Alberto Villareal, spent the night at the Holiday Inn
hotel on the Eastern Boulevard. After the second meeting between Enriquez and
Coleman, Enriquez asked Villareal to transport drugs from San Antonio and
“deliver them to Mr. Santo” at the Holiday Inn in Montgomery. After officers
apprehended Villareal with cocaine, he made a controlled delivery of the drugs.
Federal agents observed Coleman conducting countersurveillance at the Holiday
Inn, after which Coleman led Villareal to a second location to complete the
delivery. While Villareal was speaking to Coleman and a cohort, agents attempted
to make an arrest, and Coleman fled from the scene. Cellular telephone records
established that several calls were exchanged between Coleman and Enriquez,
Enriquez and Villareal, and Coleman and Villareal, on the evening of the
transaction. Ample evidence established Coleman’s knowing participation in a
conspiracy to distribute cocaine.
Coleman’s conviction is AFFIRMED.
3