Stevenson v. United States, 91-CF-32.
| Citation | 608 A.2d 732 |
| Decision Date | 07 April 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-CF-32.,91-CF-32. |
| Parties | Gary L. STEVENSON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. |
| Court | D.C. Court of Appeals |
Paul A. Signet, Springfield, Va., appointed by this court, was on the brief for appellant.
Jay B. Stephens, U.S. Atty., with whom John R. Fisher, Norman C. Bay, and De-Maurice F. Smith, Asst. U.S. Attys., Washington, D.C., were on the brief for appellee.
Before FERREN, Associate Judge, and REILLY and PRYOR, Senior Judges.
Convicted by a jury and sentenced to prison for distribution of cocaine—an offense defined in D.C.Code § 33-541(a)(1) (1988 Repl.), appellant Gary Stevenson urges this court to vacate his conviction on the ground that the jury verdict is not supported by sufficient evidence. Having examined the briefs and record, we affirm.
In a typical police operation programmed to apprehend street drug dealers, two undercover officers drove to a block on W Street, N.W., near the intersection of First, late one evening. One officer emerged from the car which his colleague then drove around the block. The first officer accosted a man standing in a well lighted alley and told him he would like to buy a specified quantity of cocaine. The stranger (Edward Washington) handed the officer a packet containing rock cocaine and was given a twenty dollar bill in pre-recorded currency.
In the meantime, the other officer, having driven back to W Street, observed the exchange between Washington and his fellow policeman. He noticed that another man, later identified as appellant Stevenson, was standing only a few feet away from Washington and was watching the transaction. When the sale was completed and the officer who had made the purchase was returning, the second officer saw Washington immediately hand over the bill he had just received to Stevenson.
Responding to broadcasted descriptions of the two men, a team of arresting officers arrived on the scene and took both men into custody. During a search of appellant's pockets incidental to arrest, police found the incriminating twenty dollar bill among other items of currency.
In a joint trial before a jury, appellant testified that on the particular evening, he had driven to the W Street block to collect twenty dollars owed him by Washington for an unpaid haircut. Upon discovering his friend there, he parked his car, the two men met, and after a brief exchange of words, Washington went back to his house and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lowman v. US
...of a controlled substance was supported by the evidence. Id. at 529. Griggs is controlling here.3See also Stevenson v. United States, 608 A.2d 732, 732-33 (D.C.1992) (defendant stood nearby during drug transaction, seller immediately gave money from sale to defendant; aiding and abetting be......
-
Spencer v. US
...v. United States, 678 A.2d 24, 28 (D.C.1996); see Lowman, supra, 632 A.2d at 89-90; Griggs, supra, 611 A.2d at 528; Stevenson v. United States, 608 A.2d 732, 733 (D.C.1992); Green v. United States, 608 A.2d 156, 158 (D.C.1992). Spencer now offers a different interpretation of the conversati......
-
Bedney v. US
...be in the light most favorable to the government,9 this evidence was sufficient to support appellant's conviction. Stevenson v. United States, 608 A.2d 732, 733 (D.C.1992). "The government need not establish that appellant distributed the drugs herself . . . in order to prove that she aided......
-
Griggs v. US, 90-CF-1445.
...unlike Lawrence, the jury did conclude that appellant aided and abetted Williams' sale of cocaine to Officer Davis. In Stevenson v. United States, 608 A.2d 732 (D.C.1992), an undercover officer noticed appellant Stevenson — who was convicted of cocaine distribution — standing a few feet awa......