United States v. David Piaquadio

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedJuly 14, 2021
Docket20-2841
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. David Piaquadio (United States v. David Piaquadio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. David Piaquadio, (3d Cir. 2021).

Opinion

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

__________

No. 20-2841 __________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

DAVID PIAQUADIO, Appellant

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Criminal No. 4-15-cr-00249-001) District Judge: Honorable Christopher C. Conner

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) April 29, 2021

BEFORE: PHIPPS, NYGAARD, and ROTH, Circuit Judges

(Filed: July 14, 2021)

OPINION * __________ NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Following a non-jury trial, the District Court convicted David Piaquadio on four

counts of drug-related offenses. 1 He challenges the District Court’s conclusion in Counts

One and Four that the Fentanyl he distributed caused serious bodily injury, making him

liable under the enhanced penalty provision of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(C). He asserts

there is no evidence of but-for causation. See United States v. Gonzalez, 905 F.3d 165,

189 (3d Cir. 2018). He adds that the victim did not suffer serious bodily injury because

there is no evidence that the victim was ever at “substantial risk” of dying. 21 U.S.C.A. §

802(25)(A). We will affirm the judgment of conviction and sentence.

Our plenary review on the sufficiency of the evidence is ‘“highly deferential,”’

focusing on the question of ‘“whether there is substantial evidence that, when viewed in

the light most favorable to the government, would allow a rational trier of fact to

convict.’” United States v. Bornman, 559 F.3d 150, 152 (3d Cir. 2009), as amended

(Apr. 24, 2009), as amended (May 5, 2009) (quoting United States v. Helbling, 209 F.3d

226, 238 (3d Cir. 2000)). We review findings of “historical or narrative events” in non-

jury criminal cases for clear error. United States v. Delerme, 457 F.2d 156, 160 (3d Cir.

1 Piaquadio challenges his conviction on Count One (conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 846) and Count Four (serious bodily injury resulting from use of controlled substances that Appellant distributed and possessed with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a)). Both counts require a mandatory minimum prison sentence of twenty years. See 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(C). The District Court sentenced Piaquadio to 20 years imprisonment on each of the four counts, served concurrently. It also imposed a supervised release term of three years on each count to be served concurrently and special assessments totaling $400. 2 1972). “We do not weigh evidence or determine the credibility of witnesses.” United

States v. Gambone, 314 F.3d 163, 170 (3d Cir. 2003).

Joshua Moroschok went to Piaquadio’s house on March 12, 2015. He used a bag

of heroin while there and agreed to run some errands for Piaquadio in exchange for three

oxycodone pills. The District Court credited Moroschok’s testimony that, after he

returned, he asked Piaquadio for a Fentanyl patch and agreed to pay for it the next day.

He went home after Piaquadio supplied him with the Fentanyl. The District Court also

credited Moroschok’s testimony that he placed one-quarter of the Fentanyl patch on a

spoon, added citric acid, extracted the opiate by heating it over a flame, and injected it

into his arm with a syringe. He remembered nothing else until he was in the ambulance.

But testimony from others described what happened next.

Moroschok lived with his mother. She testified that, shortly after midnight,

Moroschok’s dog alerted her to a problem. She found her son on the floor of his room

unconscious with a syringe stuck in his arm and a spoon nearby on the floor. He

struggled to breathe. She called 911. The first to arrive on the scene was Chief of Police

Christopher Brackman. He observed that Moroschok was unconscious on the floor with

shallow breathing. He administered a sternum rub but Moroschok’s condition did not

change. Brackman testified that he saw a needle stuck in Moroschok’s shirt sleeve, a

burning candle nearby, and a spoon with some substance on it—identified by a laboratory

as Fentanyl. Later he searched the room and found an item he associated with heroin use.

An Emergency Medical Technician, Douglas Parsell, arrived next. He observed

Moroschok’s shallow breathing and recorded his oxygen saturation as 75 percent. He

3 assessed Moroschok’s low oxygen saturation as life-threatening and gave him six liters of

oxygen in the ambulance. Parsell administered a sternum rub and got a response from

Moroschok, who—at some point after that—told him that he had taken Fentanyl.

Donald DuVall, a paramedic, joined the ambulance en route to the hospital.

DuVall observed that Moroschok’s pupils were constricted, his speech was slurred, and

his breathing was shallow, with an oxygen saturation of 83 percent. DuVall assessed that

it was appropriate to administer intravenously one milligram of naloxone, a drug used to

reverse the effects of an opiate overdose, to improve his breathing. Moroschok vomited

and he became more alert. His oxygen saturation rose to 97 percent. Moroschok told

DuVall he heated a patch of Fentanyl and injected it.

Perry Doan, D.O., who is board-certified in emergency medicine, treated

Moroschok at the emergency room. He noted that his oxygen saturation was at 98

percent when he arrived. Dr. Doan testified that Moroschok told him he had heated a

Fentanyl patch mixed with Mountain Dew and injected it. Moroschok also told him that

he had used heroin and oxycodone. The hospital record showed that a portion of a patch

(later identified by a laboratory as containing Fentanyl) and three pills (identified by a

laboratory as oxycodone) were found on Moroschok during the examination. When

asked, Moroschok affirmed that the pills were his. The hospital discharged Piaquadio

about nine hours later.

Robert Julien, M.D., Ph.D., a specialist in anesthesiology and pharmacology was

called by Piaquadio to testify. He reviewed the record and opined that Moroschok’s

condition on that evening was not life-threatening. He acknowledged that an oxygen

4 saturation level of 75 percent could pose a mortal threat but stated that it is not

necessarily so. Pointing to his improvement with just oxygen Dr. Julien posited that

Moroschok could have recovered on his own. And he noted the lack of laboratory results

showing Fentanyl use. But on cross-examination Julien acknowledged that injecting the

amount of Fentanyl contained in one-quarter of a patch has a high risk of being fatal. He

also stated that the mother’s initial call to 911 and the medical treatment Moroschok

received after that were appropriate to the condition that he presented.

Dr. Doan observed that Moroschok’s condition before arriving at the hospital—his

shallow breathing and oxygen saturation of 75 percent—pointed to a strong risk of

hypoperfusion. This is a condition in which the body’s cells are not receiving sufficient

oxygen.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Matias Delerme, Jr.
457 F.2d 156 (Third Circuit, 1972)
United States v. William F. Helbling
209 F.3d 226 (Third Circuit, 2000)
United States v. Bornman
559 F.3d 150 (Third Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Antrell Lewis
895 F.3d 1004 (Eighth Circuit, 2018)
United States v. Amy Gonzalez
905 F.3d 165 (Third Circuit, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. David Piaquadio, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-david-piaquadio-ca3-2021.