UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
BARTHOLOMEW O'SHEA AND MILTON K. PINDER, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

5th Cir. | 1979-01-22
No. 78-5368
588 F.2d 199 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1979)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the jury could infer guilt for importation of marijuana beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence presented.


Facts & Procedural History

Customs officers found defendants O'Shea and Pinder on a boat carrying 4,565 pounds of marijuana in Lake Worth Inlet. A note found on O'Shea contained…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Defendants appeal their convictions for importation of marijuana, claiming insufficient evidence that the marijuana seized was en route from outside the United States.

Customs and law enforcement officers patrolling Lake Worth Inlet in the early morning hours of August 12, 1977, sighted an approaching boat about one-half mile from the inlet. The boat entered the inlet and was found to contain 4,565 pounds of marijuana. Defendants O’Shea and Pinder were on board. In O’Shea’s shirt pocket was a paper bearing a drawing of a boat labelled “110 foot” and the following notations:

You are BALLYO II UHF channel 68 70 looking for the Fish Hawk Capt Matillia Light east about 3-6 miles Or call me at 1-942-2212 Mr. Hugh’s code 9m

At trial a customs patrol officer testified that Matanilla Reef and Shoals is located in Bahamian waters, about 75 miles northeast of Lake Worth Inlet.

Defendants were convicted of importation of marijuana, 21 U.S.C.A. § 952(a) and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a)(1). Each was sentenced to four years imprisonment on each count with sentences to run concurrently. Additionally, O’Shea received concurrent special parole terms of three years and Pinder received concurrent special parole terms of two years.

Although the circumstances of defendants’ appeal are ideal for application of the concurrent sentence doctrine, see Government of Canal Zone v. Eulberg, 581 F. 2d 1216, 1217 (5th Cir. 1978), we have reviewed the record and conclude that the jury could infer from the evidence presented that O’Shea and Pinder were, guilty of importation of marijuana beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Littrell, 574 F. 2d 828, 832 (5th Cir. 1978).

AFFIRMED.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw