Throckmorton

United States v. Throckmorton

Good Law
87 F.3d 1069·96 Daily Journal DAR 7905·1996 WL 360585·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 15688·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4913
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 1, 1996Nos. 95-50184, 95-50204California1,611 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thompson, J.

Brace Hamilton Throckmorton and Mark Calicchio appeal their convictions for conspiracy to import a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963 ; importing a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a) & 960(a)(1); possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1); and conspiracy to possess a controlled substance with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 .

Throckmorton contends the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion to sever his trial from Calicchio’s. Both defendants contend the district court erred by responding, outside of their presence, to a note from the jury.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm all convictions as to both defendants.

I

Throckmorton and Calicchio were apprehended off-loading more than 1000 kilograms of marijuana from a sailboat. Prior to their joint trial, Throckmorton moved to sever his trial from Calicchio’s on the ground their defenses were antagonistic. Throckmorton argued that he would be prejudiced by Calicchio’s defense, in which Calicchio intended to implicate Throckmorton, admit that the drug transaction…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.