[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-10400
NOVEMBER 4, 2011
Non-Argument Calendar
JOHN LEY
________________________ CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 4:09-cr-00011-RH-WCS-3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(November 4, 2011)
Before WILSON, PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Johnson appeals his conviction for conspiring to possess with
intent to distribute five or more grams of crack cocaine. 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(B)(iii). Johnson argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his
conviction. We affirm.
The district court did not err by denying Johnson’s motion for a judgment of
acquittal. The testimonies of two federal agents, Patrick Sanford and Michael
Graham, and of Dondrick Eaves and recordings of telephone conversations
established that Johnson conspired with his suppliers and Eaves to distribute five
or more grams of crack cocaine. See United States v. Bacon, 598 F.3d 772,
775–76 (11th Cir. 2010). Sanford testified that Graham, acting as a confidential
informant, purchased from Eaves cocaine brokered on behalf of Johnson and other
suppliers. Sanford observed a drug transaction between Graham, Eaves, and
Johnson at a flea market, and later Graham gave Sanford a package of 7.2 grams
of crack cocaine that Graham said he had purchased from Johnson at the market.
Both Graham and Eaves testified that Johnson had sold Graham the package of
crack cocaine and that they had purchased cocaine from Johnson on other
occasions. Eaves also testified that he would contact Johnson about interested
buyers of cocaine and that Johnson and other suppliers would compensate Eaves
by giving him cocaine in lieu of money. Five telephone conversations between
2
Eaves and Johnson corroborated the testimonies of Graham and Eaves about
Johnson’s drug sales and established that Johnson had relationships with other
drug sellers. In four telephone calls, Eaves and Johnson discussed returning some
inferior cocaine that Johnson had purchased, obtaining cocaine from suppliers
Louis Bunch and Willie Thompson, and trying to acquire a “quarter” of cocaine.
During a fifth conversation, Johnson told Eaves that he had some customers for
him. Eaves authenticated the telephone calls, and he testified about other
conversations with Johnson involving purchases of cocaine and using Thompson
as a supplier. Although the evidence is circumstantial, it is more than sufficient to
prove a “‘concert of action,’” United States v. Thompson, 422 F.3d 1285, 1290
(11th Cir. 2005) (quoting United States v. Guerra, 293 F.3d 1279, 1285 (11th Cir.
2002)), among Johnson, Eaves, and other suppliers to distribute cocaine.
We AFFIRM Johnson’s conviction.
3