United States v. Steven Donovan, Vincent C. Donovan, Patrick A. Shea, and Stephen J. Dineen

Citation: 24 F.3d 908Docket: 92-3583, 92-3624, 92-3625 and 92-3650

Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; July 14, 1994; Federal Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

On January 7, 1992, a grand jury indicted Vincent Donovan, Steven Donovan, Patrick Shea, and Stephen Dineen for conspiracy to distribute cocaine. Additional charges included possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and traveling in interstate commerce to facilitate illegal activities. All four defendants were tried together and convicted on all counts. Each defendant appealed their convictions, with all but Steve Donovan also appealing their sentences. The court affirmed the convictions.

The facts revealed that from the mid-1980s, Vince Donovan led an extensive cocaine distribution scheme in Milwaukee, beginning with a connection to a Colombian supplier in Florida in 1985. Vince introduced his brother Steve to the supplier in 1986, leading to discussions about large-scale cocaine transactions. The Florida supplier subsequently visited Milwaukee and approved the Donovans' operation.

Steve Donovan, along with his girlfriend, made multiple trips to Florida to obtain kilograms of cocaine in late 1986 and early 1987, with Vince Donovan involved in the January transaction. After Wanda Young retired from courier duties due to pregnancy, Vince enlisted Stephen Dineen, who made several trips to Florida to procure cocaine for the operation, receiving payments from Vince for his services. Dineen's frequent absences from work led him to disclose the drug activities to his employer, suggesting investment in the cocaine scheme.

Vince Donovan's drug operation faced a temporary setback when Dineen was arrested on September 22, 1987, in Chicago for possessing 1.5 kilograms of cocaine from a Florida supplier. Donovan traveled to Chicago with Dineen's roommate, secured legal representation for Dineen, and provided $5,000 for attorney fees, leading to the dismissal of the charges against Dineen. Following his arrest, Dineen attempted two additional trips to Florida to procure cocaine, successfully purchasing two kilograms on his last trip in June 1988 with funds from Donovan.

In December 1987, Kizel entered the cocaine trade, initially buying from Shea. By February 1988, Kizel and Shea jointly purchased one kilogram of cocaine. In March 1988, Donovan connected Kizel with his Florida supplier, resulting in Kizel purchasing cocaine for himself and Donovan. Kizel mistakenly delivered cocaine intended for Donovan to Shea but faced no repercussions from Donovan. Throughout 1988, Kizel acquired approximately 15 kilograms from Shea and 3 kilograms from the Florida supplier.

In December 1988, Kizel organized a meeting with Shea and Donovan to discuss expanding their operation based on the Florida supplier's offer. They planned to rent a storage locker for cocaine but ultimately opted to buy from Shea's cheaper Chicago source. In February 1989, Kizel secured ten kilograms from the Florida supplier, distributing some to Shea, while Donovan traveled to Florida to obtain two kilograms himself.

In February 1989, Kizel's operation was nearly compromised when law enforcement raided his storage facilities; however, he had relocated his cocaine. Undeterred, Donovan met the Florida supplier in April 1989 to negotiate a larger deal, which fell through due to a lack of cash. In October 1989, informant Wanda Young provided the IRS with details about the cocaine trafficking involving Shea, Steve Donovan, and Vince Donovan, indicating they primarily sourced cocaine from Shea and that Steve sold several ounces weekly.

Authorities pursued efforts to dismantle the Donovan cocaine ring, presenting various pieces of evidence, including drug paraphernalia, aborted drug transactions, threats made by key figures against witnesses, and unsuccessful attempts to entrap the defendants. The investigation culminated in a six-count indictment on January 7, 1992, against four defendants.

The defendants contested the sufficiency of the evidence supporting their conspiracy convictions, arguing that no single conspiracy was proven and that they did not participate in any alleged conspiracy. The court evaluated the evidence favorably towards the government, emphasizing that the jury must find essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. It noted that the government must demonstrate membership in the conspiracy via substantial evidence, which can include circumstantial evidence.

The court clarified that jurors are expected to apply their common sense and experience to infer reasonable conclusions from circumstantial evidence without reweighing it or judging witness credibility, a task reserved for the jury. The crime of conspiracy requires proof that the defendants were aware of and intended to join the agreement, even if the specifics of such agreements in drug distribution cases can be complex. 

Despite the lack of cohesion among Vince Donovan’s associates, the evidence painted a clear picture of collaboration among the core defendants—Steve Donovan, Vince Donovan, and Pat Shea—who were actively involved in cocaine distribution. Vince Donovan specifically established a cocaine supply line from Florida to Milwaukee, which was utilized by his associates for their drug dealings.

Evidence indicates a collaborative conspiracy involving multiple individuals in cocaine trafficking, despite claims of competition among them. Vince Donovan played a pivotal role, orchestrating the procurement and distribution of cocaine, as evidenced by detailed testimony from the Florida supplier outlining his actions, including negotiations and payment processes. Pat Shea's involvement, while circumstantial, was supported by testimony regarding his financial contributions towards cocaine purchases, phone records linking him to Donovan, and evidence of drug paraphernalia bearing his fingerprints. Additionally, testimonies from drug dealers and customers suggested a partnership between Shea and Donovan. Dineen attempted to minimize his involvement, arguing he was unaware of the overarching conspiracy; however, evidence showed he made multiple trips to Florida to obtain cocaine and was aware of the group's investments. Legal precedent clarifies that knowledge of every detail of the conspiracy is not necessary for a defendant to be deemed a coconspirator.

Dineen's role in the cocaine conspiracy, despite not being a 'core' participant, was critical due to his involvement in cocaine delivery, establishing his culpability. Minor members of a conspiracy can be held accountable for all crimes committed in furtherance of that conspiracy, as they benefit from each other's contributions. Dineen was compensated well for his involvement, supporting the adequacy of evidence for his conviction. 

The defendants argued that the evidence presented by the government indicated multiple conspiracies rather than a single one as charged. However, the court found the evidence sufficient to establish a single conspiracy, treating the variance claim as insufficient evidence. 

Shea and Vince Donovan contended that the district court erred by denying their motions for severance, claiming prejudice from evidence against other defendants. The court must balance judicial efficiency against potential prejudice, requiring defendants to demonstrate 'severe prejudice.' The court found that the evidence they cited was related to the single conspiracy, not prejudicial spillover, thus upholding the denial of severance.

Steve Donovan challenged the testimony of Wanda Young, arguing it was based on improperly obtained documents. However, as he did not object during trial, the court evaluated the admissibility for plain error and concluded that Young's testimony stemmed from her personal experience and did not reference any IRS documentation, affirming its admission.

Finally, the defendants claimed that remarks made by the government during closing arguments compromised their right to a fair trial and self-incrimination. The court assessed the remarks for impropriety but determined they were not improper, thereby not needing to evaluate their impact on the overall trial.

Defendants argue the government improperly referenced cocaine's impact on two witnesses during trial. Prosecutors are allowed to discuss admitted evidence and draw reasonable inferences, as established in United States v. Tipton. The defendants' claim that such arguments imply guilt is rejected, as the comments do not equate to the improper "send a message to drug dealers" remarks in United States v. Solivan. The prosecutor merely reiterated trial evidence and encouraged jurors to consider it.

Additionally, defendants contest a government rebuttal statement labeling defense counsel's argument about a 'hub and wheel' conspiracy as an "irrelevant sideshow." This remark was deemed appropriate, as it was a direct response to defense claims and emphasized the need to assess the existence of a single conspiracy agreement, aligning with precedent in Townsend.

The defendants also assert that their right against self-incrimination was violated by comments seemingly shifting the burden of proof. The analysis hinges on discerning whether the prosecutor intended to reference the defendants' silence or whether such comments could be interpreted that way by the jury. The court finds no such intention or reasonable interpretation in the government's remarks, which focused on proving a single agreement.

Lastly, the defendants argue the district court neglected to instruct the jury on multiple conspiracies. They proposed an instruction indicating the possibility of separate conspiracies existing alongside a single conspiracy charge. The defendants assert that the evidence does not support a single conspiracy involving all parties, suggesting there were multiple separate conspiracies related to contraband transactions.

The district court's jury instructions emphasized that the government needed to prove the existence of a single conspiracy as alleged in the indictment for a conviction. Membership in a different conspiracy would not suffice for a guilty verdict, but it would not preclude a conviction if there was sufficient evidence of involvement in the charged conspiracy. The defendants argued that the evidence failed to show their involvement in a single conspiracy. The appellate review of jury instructions requires evaluating the overall charge to determine if the jury was misled and understood its duties. Defendants are entitled to have their defense theory presented but not to specific instructions. Provided the instructions accurately reflect the law, they are upheld on appeal. The district court's instructions were deemed proper, accurately representing the law and the defendants' theory without causing prejudice. 

Regarding sentencing, defendants Dineen, Shea, and Vince Donovan contested the district court's calculation of cocaine quantities attributed to them, claiming they were held accountable for amounts outside their direct involvement or foreseeability. The amount of drugs in a conspiracy is a factual issue subject to clear error review. Each coconspirator is liable for drugs they distributed and those that were reasonably foreseeable. The scope of the conspiratorial agreement each joined must be established to determine liability. The sentencing judge must independently assess the base offense level, as a general verdict does not clarify the specific conspiracy involvement or the drug quantities.

The district court conducted sentencing hearings for three defendants, making specific findings regarding the amount of cocaine attributable to each. Steve Dineen was attributed between five and fifteen kilograms, with the court affirming that evidence of his direct involvement in cocaine transportation justified this amount. Patrick Shea was attributed fifteen kilograms, supported by trial evidence and the presentence report, with the court concluding this amount was reasonably foreseeable in the context of the cocaine conspiracy. Vince Donovan was attributed over fifteen kilograms, based on extensive evidence from the presentence report and trial testimonies, with the court rejecting his claim for a lower attribution as unreasonable. Additionally, Donovan contested a two-point offense level increase for his role as an organizer in the conspiracy. The court found sufficient evidence, including testimony from a Florida supplier, to support this enhancement, establishing Donovan's significant involvement in orchestrating cocaine transactions. The district court’s handling of the trial and the resulting sentences were deemed fair and well-supported by evidence, leading to the affirmation of the convictions for Dineen, Shea, and Donovan.