United States of America v. Lonnie John White

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LONNIE JOHN WHITE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30201
D.C. No. 3:07-CR-00136-TMB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted July 29, 2010
Anchorage, Alaska
Before: SCHROEDER, O’SCANNLAIN and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
A jury convicted Lonnie White of one count of possessing with intent to
distribute a mixture or substance containing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A), and two counts of distributing a mixture or substance
containing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and
FILED
AUG 05 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
(b)(1)(B). The district court sentenced him to 240 months’ imprisonment. White
timely appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his
convictions and sentence.
A rational juror could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that each of the
substances seized contained a detectable amount of cocaine base; contrary to
White’s assertion, the government was not required to prove that the substances
consisted of cocaine base in their entirety. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(ii),
(b)(1)(B)(ii); Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453, 459 (1991). Viewing the
evidence in the light most favorable to the government, a rational juror could have
also found beyond a reasonable doubt that the substances seized were the same
ones weighed, such that there was no break in the chain of custody. The testimony
of the government’s witnesses, together with the other evidence presented at trial,
is sufficient to support White’s convictions and sentence. See Jackson v. Virginia,
443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --