STORY BASED ON BOSTON DRUG DEALER

http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1182.01A



These cases arise out of an ______________ extensive undercover law enforcement operation targeted at the "New York Boys," a large-scale drug distribution ring operating out of the Orchard Park Housing Project in Roxbury, Massachusetts. The seven defendants currently before the court appeal their convictions, their sentences, or both. We affirm the district court's rulings on all but one point.1 I. On December 11, 1990, a federal grand jury indicted Darryl Whiting, Sean Dixon, Renaldo Pledger, Edwin Carmichael, and Steven Wadlington--as well as 26 co- defendants--for conspiracy to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846. A superseding indictment returned on April 11, 1991, expanded the case to include a total of 50 defendants, including Kenneth Bartlett and William Bowie. The individual defendants were also charged with various combinations of substantive cocaine distribution, 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1), firearms offenses, 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1); 26 U.S.C. 5861(d), or money laundering, 18 U.S.C. 1956(2)(1), and Whiting was alleged to be the organizer and ____________________ 1The published version of this opinion includes only the statement of facts (part I) and the discussion of those issues that may be of general interest (parts II and III). The remaining portions of the opinion as filed (parts IV-VI) address issues that do not appear to have precedential importance. See First Cir. R. 36.2. ___ -8- -8- supervisor of a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. 848. Rather than try 50 defendants at once, the district court severed the case into smaller cases. The first five defendants named above ("the first-trial defendants") were placed in the initial trial group, along with a sixth defen- dant (David Waight) who has not appealed. Trial began on June 17, 1991, and continued for 18 days spread over the next four weeks. The evidence consisted primarily of the testimony of undercover agents and cooperating co-defendants. Taken in the light most favorable to the government, United ______ States v. Gonzalez-Torres, 980 F.2d 788, 789 (1st Cir. 1992), ______ _______________ the evidence showed the following: The first-trial defendants, together with many other individuals, were members of or associated with the "New York Boys," a street gang headed by Whiting and operating out of the Orchard Park Housing Project in Roxbury, Massachusetts. The gang was so named because many of its members hailed from Queens, New York. During the period from 1986 to 1990, the New York Boys evolved into a large, highly structured organization that employed up to 100 different people and sold cocaine and cocaine base ("crack" cocaine) in shifts 24 hours a day. The Whiting organization received its cocaine from New York City. A number of couriers transported the drugs to -9- -9- Boston on airline shuttles. The drugs were then processed-- "cut" with dilutants and divided into individual bags--at several different apartments located outside the Orchard Park Project. Finally, the cocaine was sold at Orchard Park through an elaborate network of personnel: "runners" who met customers and took their money; other individuals who "worked the pack" by holding small quantities of cocaine and distributing it to incoming runners in exchange for cash; and a third group who held larger inventories of cocaine packs in more secure locations and periodically resupplied those "working the pack." Additional workers served as lookouts for police or provided security against rival gangs. During the organization's most prosperous period, the New York Boys sold as much as five kilograms of cocaine per week, grossing up to $100,000 in a single half-day shift. The organization sent substantial sums out of Boston via Western Union, giving rise to money-laundering charges against Whiting and Carmichael. Many of the workers were paid up to $1,000 per week for their services, although not consistently. Whiting invested funds in various Roxbury businesses, including a barber shop, video store, and the Crown Social Hall. Although this hall functioned as a community center, it also served as a front for drug distribution activities and a means of laundering the proceeds of drug sales. Whiting also sponsored rap concerts, -10- -10- barbecues, and other social events, and provided gifts of clothing and money to youth in the Roxbury community. The government's witnesses testified about numerous weapons possessed by defendants and acts of violence done to maintain discipline within the organization and security vis- a-vis rival gangs. Security measures were elaborate: gang members were equipped with binoculars, walkie-talkies, and headphones and had ready access to firearms ranging from riot pump shotguns to Uzi machine guns. There was extensive evidence of beatings and other acts of violence against members of the organization who stole money or cocaine, attempted to sell drugs on their own, or otherwise disobeyed orders. The first-trial defendants mounted a defense consisting primarily of attacks on the credibility of the government's witnesses. Defense counsel attacked the testimony of one of the government's two primary undercover operatives, Jeffrey Coy, by emphasizing instances in which Coy had failed to follow proper police procedures and by showing that Coy had suffered serious psychological and emotional problems during and after the investigation.