United States v. Don Lamar Love, Also Known as Pink, United States of America v. Dewayne D. Phillips, Also Known as Boss

219 F.3d 721
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJuly 28, 2000
Docket99-3291, 99-3384
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 219 F.3d 721 (United States v. Don Lamar Love, Also Known as Pink, United States of America v. Dewayne D. Phillips, Also Known as Boss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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. Don Lamar Love, Also Known as Pink, United States of America v. Dewayne D. Phillips, Also Known as Boss, 219 F.3d 721 (8th Cir. 2000).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Don Lamar Love and Dewayne D. Phillips (collectively the appellants) appeal their drug-related convictions and sentences. We affirm.

The appellants raise several contentions related to their trial. We reject all of their arguments. First, the record contains substantial evidence on which the jury reasonably could have found Love guilty of conspiracy to distribute cocaine. Second, having considered Phillips’s allegations of trial error related to the district court’s voir dire about racial bias, the ad[722]*722mission of drug evidence offered by the government, and the jurors’ review of trial exhibits during deliberations, we find no abuse of discretion by the district court.

The appellants also raise arguments about their sentences. We reject these arguments as well. The district court’s sentence-related factual findings about drug quantities have ample support in the record and none are clearly erroneous. Because the district court made no mistakes when imposing the appellants’ sentences, we must affirm the sentences.

Having satisfied ourselves that the cases were well tried in the district court, that no error of law or fact appears, and that the appellants’ appeals simply involve the application of settled principles of law to unique facts, we conclude the issues do not warrant a comprehensive opinion. We thus affirm the appellants’ convictions and sentences without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
219 F.3d 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-don-lamar-love-also-known-as-pink-united-states-of-ca8-2000.