United States of America v. Douglas Coleman Crawford

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DOUGLAS COLEMAN CRAWFORD,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-50576
D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00818-GHK-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
George H. King, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 30, 2010**
Pasadena, California
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, O’SCANNLAIN and GOULD, Circuit
Judges.
Sufficient evidence supported the district court’s finding that defendant
distributed fifty or more grams of cocaine base on two separate occasions. See
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318–19 (1979). This isn’t a case where the
FILED
SEP 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

page 2
district court approximated drug quantity from circumstantial evidence. See
United States v. Culps, 300 F.3d 1069, 1076 (9th Cir. 2002). The weights were
corroborated by expert testimony and defendant’s own admissions as to his
conduct, and we give special deference to the district court’s credibility
determinations. See United States v. Haswood, 350 F.3d 1024, 1028 (9th Cir.
2003).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --