United States v. Howard

953 F.2d 610 (11th Cir. 1992)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D approached his long-time friend Richard Landrum (Landrum), and asked him for help in obtaining fifty-one hundred pounds of marijuana. D was aware that Landrum had recently been arrested on narcotics charges. Landrum informed the DEA and was introduced to DEA agent Dolan. Landrum was instructed to make a monitored telephone call to D to discuss the marijuana deal. Dolan told Landrum that the scenario would be that an individual by the name of 'Mike' would be bringing the marijuana in from Texas. As originally planned, Dolan was to pose as 'Mike.' Numerous telephone conversations were recorded. D stated that a portion of the purchase money would be provided by a third party. D's side of the taped conversation was only partially audible, so the district court, after having the tape played for the jury, permitted, over objection, the monitoring agent, Harvey, to testify as to its contents. According to Harvey, D made references during the call to an earlier attempt on his part to purchase marijuana and to the manner and price at which he planned to resell the marijuana about to be purchased. Later, Landrum and D agreed to meet 'Mike.' One hundred pounds of marijuana was to be exchanged for $80,000.00. Landrum, wearing a voice transmitter and recording device, went to D's home where D showed him the purchase money, which he had concealed in a 'six-pack' size cooler. D and Landrum then went to D's sister's house, where they picked up her Buick and, with the money in the trunk, left to pick up the marijuana. DEA planned to have the car stopped by a Georgia State Patrolman. The Patrolman set up a roadblock and stopped Landrum and D. The Patrolman asked for and received permission from D to search the vehicle for burglary tools. The search revealed the cash hidden in the cooler in the trunk. D stated that the money and the car belonged to his sister. The Patrolman explained to D that, although his money was being seized, he was not under arrest. As the money was being counted, D was questioned further and stated that the money was his and that it had been derived from the sale of cows and from certain insurance settlements. D was indicted and at trial, P played four additional tape recordings of conversations between Landrum and D which took place within ten days after the seizure. D described how he would explain the source of the money without admitting to additional tax liability and pondering how the police might have known of his travel plans beforehand. During the trial, P had an agent Harvey who listened in and recorded conversations to testify as to the statements made by D because the tapes were in part inaudible. D objected under the best evidence rule but the court allowed the statements. D was convicted and appealed.