U.S. v. Pillado

In prosecution on drug conspiracy charge stemming from incident in which defendant, along with others including govt. undercover agents, went to location and unloaded one ton of marijuana hidden in truck, Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s request for jury instruction on lesser included offense of simple possession of marijuana. Record showed that issue of intent to distribute large quantity of marijuana was in dispute where defendant presented some evidence of abandonment after he assisted others in unloading truck by simply walking away without receiving any money or drugs for his services. Ct. rejected govt. argument that evidence of possession of large quantity of drugs without intention to use it requires finding of intent to distribute. Dist. Ct. also erred in failing to give entrapment instruction where: (1) defendant, who was unconnected to others at scene, was not predisposed to commit drug conspiracy; (2) defendant initially refused to unload truck once he became aware of its contents; and (3) defendant acquiesced to unloading truck only after undercover govt. agents (including defendant’s landlord) demanded that he assist them in unloading truck. Fact that defendant had failed to present evidence of extraordinary inducement did not require different result where, as here, govt. failed to present evidence of predisposition to commit charged offense.