United States v. Helen Duffy

23 F. App'x 617

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: December 4, 2001
• Docket: 01-2186
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Helen Duffy was convicted after a jury trial of acquiring cocaine through misrepresentation, deception, and subterfuge, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(a)(3), and of possessing cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844(a). The district court 1 sentenced her to 5 months imprisonment and one year supervised release (including 5 months home detention). On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and has filed a brief arguing that Duffy’s convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence.

The evidence at trial, examined in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, see United States v. Robinson, 217 F.3d 560, 564 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 999, 121 S.Ct. 497, 148 L.Ed.2d 468 (2000), showed that Duffy, by virtue of her job responsibilities, was the only pharmacy employee with the ability to order cocaine (by having her manager sign blank order forms), to authorize payment for the cocaine, and to receive the cocaine when it was shipped. This evidence was sufficient to support both guilty verdicts. See United States v. Wilbur, 58 F.3d 1291, 1292 (8th Cir.1995); United States v. Hill, 589 F.2d 1344, 1350 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 919, 99 S.Ct. 2843, 61 L.Ed.2d 287 (1979).

We have conducted an independent review under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and conclude that there are no other nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1 . The HONORABLE DONALD E. O'BRIEN, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.