U.S. v. Robbins, 79-5203

Decision Date06 November 1980
Docket NumberNo. 79-5203,79-5203
Citation629 F.2d 1105
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lloyd Calvin ROBBINS, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Before GODBOLD, SIMPSON and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges.

GODBOLD, Circuit Judge:

In our decision, 623 F.2d 418 (5th Cir. 1980), we reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence under a "miscarriage of justice" standard, on the premise that appellant did not renew his motion for judgment of acquittal made at the conclusion of the government's case. In fact he did renew his motion, and the evidence should have been reviewed under the usual and more stringent standard of whether, viewing the evidence most favorably to the government, reasonable minds could conclude that it is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of the accused's innocence. U. S. v. Suarez, 608 F.2d 584, 586 (5th Cir. 1979). We have reviewed the evidence under this standard. It is sufficient. The motion was properly denied.

The vessel involved is a 35-foot sailing vessel owned by appellant and manned by him and his co-defendant. There was adequate evidence that appellant knew that marijuana was on board. Appellant testified as follows. While he was in port at Progreso, Mexico, a fishing village, a man asked him to transport 40 boxes of clothing and linens to the port of Cozumel, Mexico. The man explained that he wished to make the shipment on a U.S. vessel because he hoped to avoid a duty that would be imposed at Cozumel if the boxes were transported there by truck. Appellant was offered $1200, but because of the risk he was unwilling to take this amount, and the price was doubled to $2400. The first arrangement was to deliver the cargo to a reef; appellant would anchor his boat there and wait for a boat to come out from Cozumel and take the boxes. Appellant thought this too risky, so a different arrangement was made under which appellant was to rendezvous with a Cozumel boat in the Gulf 20 miles west of San Antonio, Cuba. Appellant departed Progreso harbor after dusk and went to a dock built out on the beach where he was met by a crew of men. Seven or eight men unloaded boxes from a truck on the dock and loaded them onto appellant's boat.

The vessel departed Mexico November 18 and headed deep into the Gulf of Mexico. It was boarded by the United States...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • U.S. v. Hooks
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 2 Gennaio 1986
    ...v. Liles, 670 F.2d 989, 992 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 1008, 102 S.Ct. 2300, 73 L.Ed.2d 1303 (1982); United States v. Robbins, 629 F.2d 1105, 1106 (5th Cir.1980). * Honorable Bobby R. Baldock, United States District Judge for the District of New Mexico, sitting by designation.1 The......
  • U.S. v. Liles
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 15 Marzo 1982
    ...their unlikely story that they were unaware of the marijuana until they were several miles from shore. See United States v. Robbins, 629 F.2d 1105, 1106 (5th Cir. 1980). The evidence was more than sufficient to sustain their convictions. See United States v. Mazyak, 650 F.2d 788, 791 (5th C......
  • U.S. v. MacPherson, 80-5760
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 14 Dicembre 1981
    ...argue that we upheld convictions in two similar cases: United States v. Alfrey, 620 F.2d 551 (5th Cir. 1980), and United States v. Robbins, 629 F.2d 1105 (5th Cir. 1980). In these cases, the government contends, we inferred guilty knowledge from the small size of the vessel, the size of the......
  • U.S. v. Jonas, 79-5189
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 9 Marzo 1981
    ...that the evidence was sufficient to show the defendant's intention to bring marijuana into the United States. United States v. Robbins, 629 F.2d 1105, 1106 (5th Cir. 1980). The test for sufficiency of the evidence is whether reasonable minds could conclude that the evidence is inconsistent ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT