United States Tenth Circuit

Defendant's conviction and sentence on drug trafficking charges is affirmed over claims that the district court erred in: 1) denying his motion to suppress the drug evidence seized from his van; 2) requiring him to proceed to trial alone with a jury he had jointly selected with his former co-defendant; 3) denying his Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal; 4) giving an unduly coercive partial verdict instruction; 5) relying on a drug quantity proven by a preponderance of the evidence in calculating his sentence; 6) refusing to reduce his offense level for acceptance of responsibility; 7) refusing to reduce his offense level for his minor role in the offense; 8) classifying him as a career offender based on his non-violent late return from a prison furlough; and 9) failing to dismiss the indictment because it was untimely under the Speedy Trial Act.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/27/2006
• Published 12/28/2006

Judges

• KELLY, Circuit Judge., Before KELLY, LUCERO, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Cleo Patterson, pro-se.


• For Appellees:
  
• Sue Tuck Richmond, Assistant United States Attorney, (and John C. Richter, United States Attorney, on the brief), Oklahoma City, OK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.