U.S. v. Briscoe
| Decision Date | 26 February 1990 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 87-2553,87-2583,s. 87-2553 |
| Citation | 896 F.2d 1476 |
| Parties | 30 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 831 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Phyliss BRISCOE, Folorunsho Ogundipe, Abdul Disu, Isaac Orija, Oladipo Erinle, Charles Dina, Kola Ajibade, Alaba Zach Ijitola, Sherifat Usman, Fadeke Bello, Michael Olundere Alli, Idris Duale, Leonard Smith and Albert Davies, Defendants-Appellants. to 87-2586, 87-2601 to 87-2605, 87-2612 to 87-2614 and 87-3068. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Joel Bertocchi, Asst. U.S. Atty., Anton R. Valukas, U.S. Atty., David J. Stetler, James R. Ferguson, Victoria J. Peters, Asst. U.S. Attys., Chicago, Ill., for U.S.
David Bortman, Bortman, Meyer & Barasa, Saul R. Leibowitz, Chicago, Ill., for Phyliss Briscoe.
Gerald J. Collins, Chicago, Ill., for Folorunsho Ogundipe.
John P. DeRose, DeRose & Associates, Burr Ridge, Ill., for Abdul Disu.
Gwendolyn D. Anderson, Anderson & Associates, Chicago, Ill., for Isaac Orija.
Lewis Myers, Jr., Childs, Myers & Willis, Chicago, Ill., for Oladipo Erinle.
June B. Fournier, Hillside, Ill., for Charles Dina aka Mufatan Olatonji.
Andrew B. Spiegel, Chicago, Ill., for Kola Ajibade.
Miriam F. Miquelon, Keck, Mahin & Cate, Chicago, Ill., for Alaba Z. Ijitola.
Luis M. Galvan, Office of the Federal Defender Program, Chicago, Ill., for Sherifat Usman.
Paul M. Brayman, Chicago, Ill., for Fadeke Bello.
Jack Rimland, Stamos, Rimland, Halprin & Clark, Chicago, Ill., for Michael O. Alli.
Antonio J. Curiel, Walter Jones, Jr., Curiel & Jones, Chicago, Ill., for Idris Duale.
Walter Jones, Jr., Curiel & Jones, Chicago, Ill., for Leonard Smith.
Janis D. Roberts, Thomas A. Durkin, Chicago, Ill., for Albert Davies.
Before CUDAHY, COFFEY, and MANION, Circuit Judges.
This is the consolidated appeal of fourteen individuals who, based on their involvement in a heroin importation and distribution conspiracy, were convicted of various offenses under the federal narcotics laws. On appeal, they raise a number of arguments challenging their convictions and/or sentences. We affirm.
This case arises out of an extensive heroin network centered in Chicago, Illinois. Between 1984 and 1986 this drug enterprise imported approximately three kilograms of heroin having an estimated street value of over one million dollars into the United States from Pakistan, India and Nigeria. The heroin, most of which was smuggled into this country by female couriers concealing the drug in their body cavities, was then transported to the Chicago area for distribution. In addition to the importers and couriers, this organization employed a number of distributors who were responsible for the "cutting" and packaging of the heroin, as well as street dealers, the individuals within the organization ultimately charged with keeping a steady supply of heroin in Chicago.
In early 1986, confidential informants working with the Chicago Police Department ("CPD") and the United States Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA") introduced undercover law enforcement officials to Folorunsho Ogundipe and Surakatu Shittu, the central figures controlling the drug network. On January 10, 1986, CPD Officer Nathaniel Reed met with Ogundipe and purchased approximately one-half ounce of heroin for $3,500. Two weeks later, on January 24, Officer Reed went to Ogundipe's apartment to make a second purchase of heroin. Upon his arrival, Reed encountered defendant Phyliss Briscoe, whom Ogundipe introduced as his wife. Shortly thereafter, Ogundipe told Briscoe to leave the apartment and get the "package." Briscoe returned approximately fifteen minutes later carrying a small paper bag, informed Ogundipe that she "got it," and went into the bedroom with him. Ogundipe returned with a one-ounce package of heroin, and Reed paid him $7,000. Between January and April 1986, Officer Reed also negotiated with Ogundipe for the purchase of a kilogram of heroin. Ogundipe informed Reed that a purchase of this size would involve a trip to Nigeria and that he (Ogundipe) could guarantee Reed safe passage to and from Nigeria by providing Reed with falsified passports and making the necessary arrangements, i.e., bribing, various "U.S. customs officials on his payroll." During one of their meetings, Ogundipe drove Reed to the residence of Gbolahan Taiwo, 1 who, according to Ogundipe, was the individual in charge of all the Nigerian heroin in Chicago. Ogundipe entered Taiwo's residence, returning approximately fifteen minutes later with a small package of heroin for Reed.
At approximately the same time, DEA Agent Robert Smith began purchasing heroin from Shittu. Shittu informed Agent Smith that he imported heroin from Nigeria through the use of female couriers and would be traveling to Nigeria himself to obtain a kilogram of heroin. Shittu also stated that he could supply Smith with as much heroin as he needed for a price of $6,500 to $7,500 an ounce. In March 1986, Agent Smith met with both Shittu and Ogundipe in Ogundipe's apartment and purchased one ounce of heroin for $7,500. While in Ogundipe's apartment, Agent Smith met Phyliss Briscoe, whom Ogundipe again introduced as his wife. At the close of this meeting, Shittu informed Smith that he was leaving for Nigeria and that while he was away, Ogundipe would be able to supply Smith with heroin. Smith entered into two subsequent transactions with Shittu, purchasing approximately four ounces of heroin for $25,500.
Based on this evidence, the DEA obtained authorization to intercept and record telephone calls to and from the residences of Shittu, Ogundipe and Taiwo, located in Chicago. The government operated a wiretap on Shittu's telephone from September 22 to November 12, 1986. Ogundipe's calls were monitored from September 22 until October 22. The wiretap on Taiwo's telephone commenced on October 16 and terminated on November 12. Through this wiretap investigation, the DEA was able to monitor the conversations of Shittu, Ogundipe and Taiwo, as well as identify the individuals listed on telephone company records as the subscribers to the numbers making calls to or receiving calls from these residences. The majority of the intercepted conversations were conducted in Yoruba, a language spoken in Nigeria, thus necessitating that the DEA task force charged with monitoring the conversations of Shittu, Ogundipe and Taiwo include individuals who could provide English translations of the conversations occurring during the wiretap investigation. 2 Once these conversations were translated and combined with the subscriber information from the incoming and outgoing calls, the law enforcement officials learned of Shittu's, Ogundipe's and Taiwo's heroin dealings with defendants Abdul Disu, Kola Ajibade, Charles Dina, Isaac Orija, Idris Duale, Oladipo Erinle, Albert Davies, Alaba Zach Ijitola Leonard Smith, James King, Alonzo Manning, and Jacqueline Simmons, all of whom were ultimately arrested and indicted as defendants in this case. 3
The wiretap investigation also led to the arrests of three drug couriers and their escort at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago on October 23, 1986. On October 22, Shittu received a call from an individual identifying himself as "Kunle," who was later identified as defendant Adekunle Adefuye. Adefuye stated that he had been sent by "Mrs. Agbabs" 4 and that he had just arrived in New York City from Nigeria. Adefuye asked Shittu if he could handle "one door" (one kilogram of heroin) and Shittu stated that he would take as much as Adefuye could bring with him. Adefuye made a second call to Shittu's residence in which the two discussed the price for the heroin Adefuye was transporting to Chicago. On October 23, Adefuye called Shittu a third time, stating that he and three female couriers would be arriving in Chicago that evening on American Airlines Flight 277. Upon their arrival in Chicago, Adefuye and the three couriers, defendants Sherifat Usman, Fadeke Bello and Aderemi Adefuye, 5 were arrested by DEA agents who had been dispatched to O'Hare following Adefuye's third telephone conversation with Shittu. The three couriers were taken to a hospital near O'Hare where they were x-rayed. The x-rays revealed that each woman had a foreign object in her pelvic area. After DEA agents stated that they had obtained a court order authorizing the removal of the objects, Bello and Usman removed egg-shaped objects wrapped in black electrical tape from their vaginas. The agents opened these containers and discovered that Bello had been carrying 67.62 grams of heroin and Usman had been carrying 212.5 grams of the drug. After Aderemi refused to remove the object from her pelvic area, doctors surgically withdrew from her vagina a container similar in appearance to those of Usman and Bello in which 200.62 grams of heroin was discovered. 6 After their arrest, Adefuye informed law enforcement officials that he and the three couriers had been sent to Chicago by defendant Michael Alli, an importer of heroin residing in New York City. Based on this information, DEA agents arrested Alli in his New York home on January 6, 1987.
On March 11, 1987, a federal grand jury returned a second superseding 162-count indictment charging twenty-five individuals, including the fourteen appellants, with numerous violations of the federal narcotics laws. Count One charged all defendants with participating in a heroin importation and distribution conspiracy in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 846. Specifically, the defendants were charged with conspiring: (1) to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute heroin; and (2) to use interstate telephone lines to facilitate the importation, possession, and distribution of heroin. Counts Two through Seventeen charged several of the defendants with possession, possession with intent to distribute, and distribution of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. Secs. 841(a)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Xyrem (Sodium Oxybate) Antitrust Litig.
... ... " Gilead II , 2020 WL 5507555, at *8 (emphasis in original) (quoting United States v. Briscoe , 896 F.2d 1476, 1505 (7th Cir. 1990) ). The Court addresses each element of the plausible conspiracy in turn. a. Each Defendant plausibly had ... ...
-
U.S. v. Canoy
... ... denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 439, 130 L.Ed.2d 350 (1994) ... Of course, the Supreme Court has reminded us that the potential for a disparate impact does not prove purposeful discrimination per se, as the effect of such a criterion "does not alone show its ... Nichols, 937 F.2d 1257, 1264 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 989, 117 L.Ed.2d 151 (1992); United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476, 1489 (7th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 863, 111 S.Ct. 173, 112 L.Ed.2d 137 (1990); see also, e.g., United States v. Alvarado, ... ...
-
AKINS v. U.S., 91-CF-860
... ... 13 ... Applying the Foster analysis to the conspiracy case before us, once we have found a violation of the Confrontation Clause, we analyze whether the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Foster, supra, ... See United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476, 1505 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 863, 111 S.Ct. 173, 112 L.Ed.2d 137 (1990) ... 21. Taper also claims that his ... ...
-
U.S. v. DeFries
... ... Green, 882 F.2d 999, 1001 (5th Cir.1989) ... Asking us to create an additional exception, the government argues that because we had issued our opinion by the time trial began, proceeding to trial prior to ... Graham, 83 F.3d 1466, 1472 (D.C.Cir.1996); United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476, 1514 (7th Cir.1990); United States v. Orr, 825 F.2d 1537, 1542-43 (11th Cir.1987); United States v. Towers, 775 F.2d 184, 189-90 ... ...
-
Peremptory Challenges: Free Strikes No More
...1989). 34. Supra, note 4 at 89. 35. Mendoza, supra, note 14 at 1011. 36. Greene, supra, note 32 at 280. See United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Alcantar, 897 F.2d 436 (9th Cir. 1990). 37. United States v. Iron Moccasin, 878 F.2d 226 (8th Cir. 1989). See......
-
§ 30.11 Exception—Summaries: FRE 1006
...was incredibly voluminous, and it would have been incomprehensible to the jury without summarization."); United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476, 495 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Possick, 849 F.2d 332, 339 (8th Cir. 1988) ("Rule 1006 does not require that it be literally impossible to ......
-
§ 30.11 EXCEPTION — SUMMARIES: FRE 1006
...was incredibly voluminous, and it would have been incomprehensible to the jury without summarization."); United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476, 495 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Possick, 849 F.2d 332,339 (8th Cir. 1988) ("Rule 1006 does not require that it be literally impossible to e......
-
§ 33.10 BUSINESS RECORDS: FRE 803(6)
...admissible).[109] Fed. R. Evid. 803 advisory committee's note ("electronic computer storage").[110] E.g., United States v. Briscoe, 896 F.2d 1476, 1494 (7th Cir. 1990) ("It is well established that computer data compilations are admissible as business records.") (computerized telephone reco......