United States v. Mothersill - 87 F.3d 1214 (11th Cir. 1996)

Rule:

Pinkerton co-conspirator liability applies in two situations. First, where the substantive crime is also a goal of the conspiracy, e.g., where there is a narcotics conspiracy and a corresponding substantive crime of possession or distribution of cocaine. The second scenario is where the substantive offense differs from the precise nature of the ongoing conspiracy, but facilitates the implementation of its goals. A particular co-conspirator, found guilty of conspiring to distribute drugs, may also be held liable for the substantive crime of possession of a firearm.

Facts:

Defendants conducted a drug trafficking ring. A police officer who made a traffic stop of their vehicle was killed when a pipe bomb, intended for silencing a witness, exploded in the vehicle's trunk. The district court convicted and sentenced defendants for drug- and racketeering-related offenses, and for the murder of the officer pursuant to the liability outlined in Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640. Defendants sought review.

Issue:

Under the circumstances, should the defendants’ convictions be upheld? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed. The court found that Pinkerton liability was properly imposed on defendants. The record revealed abundant evidence supporting the jury's conclusion that the killing of individuals was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the ongoing conspiracy, especially given the frequency with which weapons and violence, actual or threatened, were used in order to further the interests of the conspiracy. The court found that the individual culpability of defendants was sufficient to support their convictions pursuant to Pinkerton. The court concluded that the relationship between defendants and the officer's death was not so attenuated as to transgress the due process limitations on Pinkerton co-conspirator liability, and that defendants were more than minor participants.