US v. Pryba, Cr. No. 87-00208-A.

• Decision Date: 20 January 1988
• Docket Number: Cr. No. 87-00208-A.
• Citation: 678 F. Supp. 1218
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America v. Dennis E. PRYBA, Barbara A. Pryba, Jennifer G. Williams, and Educational Books, Inc.

678 F. Supp. 1218

UNITED STATES of America v. Dennis E. PRYBA, Barbara A. Pryba, Jennifer G. Williams, and Educational Books, Inc.

Cr. No. 87-00208-A.

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division.

January 20, 1988.

Lawrence Leiser, Asst. U.S. Atty., Alexandria, Va., for U.S.

Plato Cacheris, Washington, D.C., for Jennifer Williams.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ELLIS, District Judge.

Introduction

After eight days of trial on the issues of guilt,¹ a jury convicted Jennifer Williams and three co-defendants of various violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq., and interstate transportation of obscene material, 18 U.S.C. § 1465.² More specifically, defendant Jennifer Williams was convicted by the jury of (1) being associated with or employed by an "enterprise"³ and conducting or participating, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(4), 1962(c); (2) conspiring to use or invest income derived from a pattern of racketeering activity in the enterprise, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d); and (3) seven counts of transporting obscene material in interstate commerce for sale or distribution, 18 U.S.C. § 1465.

Defendant Williams moved for a judgment of acquittal at the conclusion of the government's case and again after the adverse verdict. The matter was briefed and argued orally, and this Memorandum Opinion records the Court's reasons for denying the motions.

The Standard for Judgment of Acquittal

A criminal defendant seeking a judgment of acquittal in the face of an adverse jury verdict must meet a rigorous standard. In the words of the Supreme Court, "the verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is substantial evidence, taking the view most favorable to the government, to support it." Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 469, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942). Cases echoing this principle are legion,⁴ as are its various formulations. Among the most frequently cited and illuminating are those of the District of Columbia Circuit. In United States v. Reese, 561 F.2d 894 (1977), that court stated the principle in these terms:

It is only when there is no evidence upon which a reasonable mind might fairly conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt that a motion for judgment of acquittal may be granted.

Id. at 898 (emphasis added); see also United States v. Tresvant, 677 F.2d 1018, 1021 (4th Cir.1982). And in United States v. Peterson, 509 F.2d 408 (1974), the D.C. Circuit chose the following formulation:

To grant a motion for acquittal, the court must find that when viewed in the light most favorable to the government, the evidence is such that a reasonable juror must have reasonable doubt as to the existence of any of the essential elements of the crime.

Id. at 411. Finally, in United States v. Singleton, 702 F.2d 1159 (D.C.Cir.1983), the court observed that, "If the evidence reasonably permits a verdict of acquittal or a verdict of guilt, the decision is for the jury to make." Id. at 1163 (quoting Curley v. United States, 160 F.2d 229, 237 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 331 U.S. 837, 67 S.Ct. 1512, 91 L.Ed. 1850 (1947)).

Here, defendant Williams specifically attacks the sufficiency of the evidence on "guilty knowledge." She contends that acquittal is required because the evidence does not show that she acted with "the requisite criminal intent." On this point, the Fourth Circuit has framed the standard for a motion for acquittal as follows:

In determining whether there was sufficient evidence regarding "knowledge" to sustain the guilty verdicts, the court must consider whether any rational trier of fact could have found the existence of knowledge beyond a reasonable doubt.

United States v. Zandi, 769 F.2d 229, 235 (1985); see also United States v. Steed, 674 F.2d 284, 286-89 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 829, 103 S.Ct. 67, 74 L.Ed.2d 68 (1982).

In sum, defendant Williams' burden on a motion for acquittal is a formidable one; she must show that viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, there is no substantial evidence to support the verdicts. To sustain the verdict, the court need only find that the record includes evidence from which a reasonable person could find guilt; it need not find that the evidence compels guilt and wholly excludes innocence. "It is not necessary to support a conviction that the evidence exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence or be wholly inconsistent with every conclusion except that of guilt, provided a reasonable trier of fact could find that the evidence establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A jury is free to choose among reasonable constructions of the evidence." United States v. Bell, 678 F.2d 547, 559 (5th Cir.1982), aff'd, 462 U.S. 356, 103 S.Ct. 2398, 76 L.Ed.2d 638 (1983); see also United States v. Slocum, 708 F.2d 587, 594 (11th Cir.1983). With this summary of the standard as a lens, we focus next on an examination of the evidence.

The Evidence

A review of the record compels the conclusion that there is ample and substantial evidence from which reasonable jurors could have found Williams guilty. At most, defendant Williams has shown only that the evidence does not exclude innocence. She has not shown that there was no evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, to support the verdicts. Nor has she shown that the government's case, as she claims, relied "totally on speculation and inferential evidence."

First, there was ample evidence to support a finding that Williams was aware of the sexually explicit nature of the materials that Dennis and Barbara Pryba's corporations were selling. The record reflects that in the 1970s, the Prybas were engaged in the business of selling and distributing sexually explicit materials. Defendant Williams, sister of co-defendant Barbara Pryba and sister-in-law of co-defendant Dennis Pryba, began working for the Prybas' various business entities in the late 1970s. During this period and well into the 1980s, Williams worked on a daily basis at the Prybas' warehouse in Maryland. Evidence adduced at trial showed that sexually explicit materials were stored at the warehouse and that the warehouse was relatively small. The jury could reasonably have concluded that the sexually explicit nature of the warehouse inventory must have been apparent to anyone working there. Moreover, the jury could reasonably have found that the sexually explicit nature of the materials shipped in interstate commerce and sold by the enterprise was evident from the invoices Williams handled as an officer and bookkeeper of the Prybas' corporations.⁵ Finally, the evidence indicated that the corporations and their employees were regularly prosecuted and convicted for sale and distribution of obscene material.⁶ Each of these, in itself, was

                      (C) May 18, 1982  - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Deviations"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Cum Again"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "Swedish Erotica No. 4"
                                          Ct. 4  - Magazine, "Swedish Erotica No. 27"
                      (D) June 15, 1982 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Sucking Young Girls"
                      (E) June 15, 1982 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Rampage"
                      (F) June 15, 1982 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Fucking Blondes"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Sweet Meats"
                      (G) June 15, 1982 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Swedish Erotica No. 12"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Swedish Erotica No. 19"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "Silky"
                      (H) June 15, 1982 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Trio"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Teenage Sex"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "American Erotica"
                      (I) June 15, 1982 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Hot Pepper"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Janet Anal Sex Queen"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "Sexercise"
                      (J) Aug. 12, 1983 - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Voluptua No. 5"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Sex Master"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "American Erotica"
                                          Ct. 4  - Magazine, "Cum Pumpers"
                                          Ct. 5  - Magazine, "Suck V-1 No. 1"
                                          Ct. 6  - Magazine, "Unreal People"
                                          Ct. 7  - Magazine, "John Holmes (No. 1 Cock)"
                                          Ct. 8  - Magazine, "Tight Assed Blond"
                                          Ct. 9  - Magazine, "Baby"
                      (K) May 16, 1983  - Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Nympho Housewives"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "Luv It"
                                          Ct. 5  - Magazine, "Sensua"
                                          Ct. 7  - Magazine, "French Pussy"
                      (L) June 6, 1983  - Ct. 1  - Magazine, "Seke Special 1981"
                                          Ct. 2  - Magazine, "Cunts Who Put Out"
                                          Ct. 3  - Magazine, "Hard Core"
                                          Ct. 4  - Magazine, "Taboo"
                                          Ct. 5  - Magazine, "Girls Who Eat Cum"
                                          Ct. 6  - Magazine, "Blondes Have More Cum No. 2"
                                          Ct. 7  - Magazine, "The Best of Cum"
                                          Ct. 8  - Magazine, "Swedish Erotica No. 30"
                                          Ct. 9  - Magazine, "Bi Guys and A Girl"
                                          Ct. 10 - Magazine, "Connoisseur Eries No. 2"
                      (M) Dec. 2, 1983  - Ct. 2  - Film, "Margaret's Target"
                                          Ct. 3  - Film, "Anally Yours"
                                          Ct. 4  - Film, "Two on a Big Stick"
                                          Ct. 5  - Film, "Black Hammer"
                                          Ct. 7  - Film, "Cum on Girls No. 4"
                                          Ct. 8  - Film, "Cum on Girls No. 6"
                      (N) Jan. 27, 1984 - Ct. 1  - Film, "Houseboat, Pt I"
                                          Ct. 2  - Film, "In and Out, Pt I"
                                          Ct. 3  - Film, "175 Second Shift"
                                          Ct. 4  - Film, "Country Girls"

...