United States v. Helen Duffy , 23 F. App'x 617 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 01-2186
    ___________
    United States of America,             *
    *
    Appellee,                  * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    v.                              * Northern District of Iowa.
    *
    Helen Duffy, also known as Helen      *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Authier,                              *
    *
    Appellant.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 21, 2001
    Filed: December 4, 2001
    ___________
    Before BOWMAN, LOKEN, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Helen Duffy was convicted after a jury trial of acquiring cocaine through
    misrepresentation, deception, and subterfuge, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(a)(3),
    and of possessing cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844(a). The district court1
    sentenced her to 5 months imprisonment and one year supervised release (including
    5 months home detention). On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw under Anders
    1
    The HONORABLE DONALD E. O’BRIEN, United States District Judge for
    the Northern District of Iowa.
    v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), and has filed a brief arguing that Duffy’s
    convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence.
    The evidence at trial, examined in the light most favorable to the jury verdict,
    see United States v. Robinson, 
    217 F.3d 560
    , 564 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    531 U.S. 999
    (2000), showed that Duffy, by virtue of her job responsibilities, was the only
    pharmacy employee with the ability to order cocaine (by having her manager sign
    blank order forms), to authorize payment for the cocaine, and to receive the cocaine
    when it was shipped. This evidence was sufficient to support both guilty verdicts.
    See United States v. Wilbur, 
    58 F.3d 1291
    , 1292 (8th Cir. 1995); United States v.
    Hill, 
    589 F.2d 1344
    , 1350 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    442 U.S. 919
    (1979).
    We have conducted an independent review under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), and conclude that there are no other nonfrivolous issues for appeal.
    Accordingly, we affirm, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-2186

Citation Numbers: 23 F. App'x 617

Judges: Bowman, Loken, Bye

Filed Date: 12/4/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024