U.S. v. Cruse

In prosecution on drug conspiracy charges arising out of long-term series of drug sales by two gangs and others, Dist. Ct. erred in failing to give buyer/seller jury instruction with respect to one defendant, even though four witnesses testified that they engaged in drug transactions with said defendant, and two witnesses stated that they occasionally sold drugs to said defendant on credit. Sporadic drug purchases on credit were insufficient to defeat said defendant’s request for buyer/seller instruction, and none of subject drug sales had usual elements of drug conspiracy such as consignment arrangements, profit sharing or distribution agreements. Moreover, evidence was equivocal as to whether said defendant was fellow gang member with others accused of drug conspiracy. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendants’ Batson claim that prosecutor used preemptory challenges to excuse two African-American jurors. Although Dist. Ct. found as “less than persuasive” prosecutor’s explanation that he excused one juror because juror was “self-employed,” Dist. Ct.’s ultimate finding that defendant failed to show that prosecutor had improper motive was entitled to deference, especially where two African-American jurors remained on jury under circumstances where prosecutor had not used all of his challenges.