United States v. Stacy Stith

MEMORANDUM

Stacy Earl Stith appeals his conviction on drug charges based on three alleged trial errors. While the issues Stith raises might require reversal in an appropriate case, the overwhelming evidence against Stith’s entrapment defense rendered any error harmless. We affirm.

We assume without deciding that the government’s cross-examination regarding Stith’s prior not-guilty pleas infringed on Stith’s constitutional right to be proved guilty of those charges beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Norris, 910 F.2d 1246, 1247 (5th Cir.1990). We need not decide that issue because even if there was error, it was harmless.

The amount of drugs that Stith had with him when he was arrested, his conduct in recorded telephone calls, and his implausible explanation of the informant’s scheme leave us convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that any error was harmless. See Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). The evidence against Stith’s entrapment defense was overwhelming. Cf. United States v. Velarde-Gomez, 269 F.3d 1023, 1034-35 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc) (considering the weight of evidence in determining whether an officer’s comments on…