UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
CHARLES DONALD BOLDIN, LEWIS CRUMP, JOHN OSCAR LUCK, JOHNNY RAY MOORE, JACK W. SCARBOROUGH, LEONARD BONNELL STEELE, AND LUIS ROSENDO ESCOBAR, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
PER CURIAM:
On petition for rehearing, we delete from our opinion reported at 772 F. 2d 719, 727 (11th Cir.1985), those two paragraphs referenced and [5, 6] and insert the following:
Our application of the Block-burger/Albernaz test to the conspiracy counts in this case shows no double jeopardy violation. Proof sufficient to prove a violation of the RICO conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(d), requires that the government demonstrate (1) the existence of an agreement, (2) the existence of an enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce, (3) the defendant’s association with the enterprise, (4) the defendant’s participation in conducting the enterprise’s affairs, and (5) that the defendant’s participation was through a pattern of racketeering activity, indicated by the commission of at least two racketeering acts. United States v. Bright, 630 F. 2d 804, 829 (5th Cir.1980).
Section 963 of Title 21, the conspiracy to import statute, requires proof of (1) the existence of an agreement (2) to import (3) a controlled substance (4) into the United States and (5) the defendant’s knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement. United States v. Bascaro, 742 F. 2d 1335, 1359-60 (11th Cir.), reh’g denied, 749 F. 2d 733 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied sub nom. Hobson v. United States, — U.S.-, 105 S.Ct. 3476, 87 L.Ed.2d 613, Villanueva v. United States, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 3477, 87 L.Ed.2d 613, Waldrop v. United States, — U.S.-, 105 S.Ct. 3488, 87 L.Ed.2d 622 (1985).
Further, proof sufficient to prove a violation of section 846 of Title 21 requires that the government show (1) the existence of an agreement (2) to possess (3) with intent to distribute (4) a controlled substance and (5) the defendant’s knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement. United States v. Cruz, 765 F. 2d 1020, 1025 (11th Cir.1985).
The petition for rehearing is in all other respects DENIED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
United States v. Caporale, 806 F.2d 1487 (11th Cir. 1986)…for the same crime after acquittal or conviction, and multiple punishments for the same crime. Albernaz v. United States, 450 U.S. 333, 101 S.Ct. 1137, 67 L.Ed.2d 275 (1981); United States v. Boldin, 772 F. 2d 719, 725 (11th Cir.1985), mod. in part, 779 F. 2d 618, cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 1269, 89 L.Ed.2d 577 (1986). In determining whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial, “the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof…
-
United States v. Erwin, 793 F.2d 656 (5th Cir. 1986)…rett Court expressly approved the distinction in Jeffers between § 846 conspiracies and substantive predicate offenses. See Garrett, 105 S.Ct. at 2420. Accord United States v. Boldin, 772 F. 2d 719, 730-31 (11th Cir.1985), modified on other grounds, 779 F. 2d 618 (11th Cir), cert. denied, 106 S.Ct. 1269 (1986); United States v. Schuster, 769 F. 2d 337, 344-45 (6th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 106 S.Ct. 1210 (1986). Defendant Garrett challenged only the use as a predicate offense of his prior conviction for marij…
-
United States v. Bollinger, 796 F.2d 1394 (11th Cir. 1986)…. Title 21 U.S.C. § 963 requires proof of “(1) the existence of an agreement (2) to import (3) a controlled substance (4) into the United States and (5) the defendants’ knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement.” United States v. Boldin, 779 F. 2d 618, 619 (11th Cir.1986), modifying 772 F. 2d 719, 727 (1985). There was clearly sufficient evidence adduced at trial to prove the first four elements and Cruz-Barrientos’ knowing and voluntary participating in an agreement to transport cocaine from Bol…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Louin Ray Bright, 630 F.2d 804 (5th Cir. 1980)
- United States v. Bascaro, 742 F.2d 1335 (11th Cir. 1984)
- United States v. Boldin, 772 F.2d 719 (11th Cir. 1985)
- United States v. Leonicio Fernando Cruz, 765 F.2d 1020 (11th Cir. 1985)