By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 9, 2012//
United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Criminal
Conspiracy — sufficiency of the evidence
Where a defendant drug dealer had a mutual support system and a family relationship with his supplier, the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for conspiracy to distribute them.
“We needn’t decide whether a conspiracy with the father was formed by the discussion with the son, or indeed pre-existed the discussion (which would be no surprise, since the father was Latine’s supplier). It is enough that the episode reveals mutual support and protection grounded in a family relationship that provided linkage that is not a common feature of wholesaling. Cf. United States v. Murray, 474 F.3d 938, 941 (7th Cir. 2007). When he learned of Latine’s arrest the defendant could simply have cleared out; instead he tried to save Latine’s business. The family connection— the defendant’s father being Latine’s direct and the son’s indirect supplier and the quarrel between father and son being forgotten in a crisis—had forged a relationship between Latine and the defendant that the jury was entitled to characterize as conspiring to distribute drugs rather than merely buying and selling them. United States v. Rea, supra, 621 F.3d at 608; United States v. Johnson, supra, 592 F.3d at 755-56.”
Affirmed.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, St. Eve, J., Posner, J.