United States v. Lawrence

727 F.3d 386 (5th Cir. 2013)

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

Ds along with Sherree Lawrence (Sherree), Gwendolyn Free (Free), and Monica Mitchell (Mitchell), transported cocaine from South America to the United Kingdom on board commercial airplanes. Parker (D), Sherree, Free, and Mitchell served as the couriers. Lawrence (D), from Nigeria and on a non-immigrant visa, lived in Houston, Texas and after marrying Sherree applied for (but never obtained) U.S. citizenship. Lawrence (D) hired drug couriers, organized and paid them, and instructed them on how to establish communication with local contacts, obtaining a visa for at least one courier, driving at least two couriers to the Houston airport, wiring at least one courier money, wiring at least one courier money while the courier was abroad on a trip to transport drugs, and instructing the couriers on how to dress and act while traveling in order to avoid detection. Parker (D) filed an application for an expedited passport, listing a travel reservation that had been booked using one of Lawrence's (D) email addresses. The passport applications for Parker (D), Free, and Sherree listed the same Houston apartment complex where Lawrence (D) lived in 2009 as an address. All trips originated in Houston. The courier traveled from Houston to South America and establish communication with a local contact. The contact would provide the courier with cocaine that had been concealed inside other items. The courier would then transport the cocaine to London by commercial airplane, stopping in several cities along the way, such as Panama City, Zurich, or Amsterdam. The couriers admitted to knowing they were transporting drugs. Once they got to London the drugs were transferred to a local contact. While Mitchell was waiting to check in for a flight to Switzerland, Panamanian authorities questioned her, searched her luggage, and found almost three kilograms of cocaine. The conspiracy and its participants quickly unraveled. Ds argued that possession with the intent to distribute would not apply to cocaine aboard an aircraft traveling between two foreign countries and drugs distributed in a foreign country. Ds argued under such circumstances the law could not be applied extraterritorially under due process of law. Ds were convicted and appealed.