Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 10-22-2021
Case Style:
United States of America v. SHENARD TYVON WELLS; RODNEY W. WELLS
United States of America v. LOLETTA DENISE SCOTT
Case Number: 00-10134
Judge: Fortunato Benavides
Court: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
New Orleans, LA - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendants with one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and one count of distribution of cocaine base charges.
On March 24, 1999, a grand jury charged Shenard Tyvon Wells
(Shenard), his wife, Loletta Scott (Loletta), his brother, Rodney W.
Wells (Rodney), and several others with one count of conspiracy to
distribute cocaine base and one count of distribution of approximately
26.2 grams of cocaine base. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Shenard
pleaded guilty to the distribution count and the government dismissed
the count of conspiracy. Also pursuant to the agreement, Shenard
promised to provide complete information about his criminal activities
and the government agreed that, if he provided substantial assistance,
it would file a motion for downward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. §
5K1.1.
3
On July 19, 1999, the government moved to revoke the plea
agreement, alleging that Shenard had failed to fully disclose his
criminal conduct and had attempted to kill one government witness and
corruptly influence another. At the revocation hearing, the government
ultimately relied solely on Shenard’s failure to cooperate, and the
district court allowed the government to revoke the agreement.
On August 11, 1999, the grand jury returned a superseding
indictment again charging Shenard, Loletta, and Rodney with one count
of conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and one count of distribution
of cocaine base. Additionally, the grand jury charged Shenard with one
count of attempting to kill a person to prevent him from communicating
with law enforcement officers and one count of attempting to intimidate
a witness. Shenard persisted in his plea of guilty to the count
alleging distribution and pleaded not guilty to the three remaining
counts. Loletta and Rodney pleaded not guilty to the conspiracy and
distribution counts.
The government introduced the following evidence at trial. On June
15, 1998, William Block and Darren Lee, both confidential informants for
the Drug Enforcement Administration, were looking for a drug dealer
named Terrence Spencer in Terrell, Texas. Instead, they ran into
Shenard and Mark Perkins.
Lee arranged for Block to buy two ounces of crack cocaine from
Shenard. Block and Lee followed Shenard and Perkins to Shenard’s
apartment, and Rodney met the men at the bottom of the stairway.
Loletta was at the apartment when the men arrived and opened the door
1 Rodney testified that he had met Shenard at the apartment to
borrow money to purchase diapers for his infant son. Rodney claimed
that he initially did not know that Shenard was conducting a drug
transaction. He realized it after he had exited the apartment to borrow
the scales. According to Rodney, he did not want to be involved in the
transaction and did not actually go to the neighbor’s apartment. He
lied when he told Shenard that the neighbor was not home.
4
to allow them entry.
Shenard, Rodney, Block, Lee, and Perkins seated themselves in the
den and discussed the transaction. Loletta remained outside the den
during the entire transaction. At one point, Shenard called for his
wife to bring him the cocaine. However, she was unable to locate it in
the refrigerator, and Shenard retrieved it. After some concern was
expressed regarding the weight of the cocaine, Shenard asked his brother
to borrow scales from a neighbor. Rodney then left the apartment and
returned, stating that the neighbor was not home.1
Shenard also instructed Loletta to bring him a plastic bag. She
complied by handing a bag to Rodney who then gave it to Shenard.
Shenard placed the crack cocaine in the bag. After paying cash for the
cocaine, Block and Lee left the apartment with the cocaine. Shenard
handed Loletta the money, which she took to their bedroom.
All three appellants testified at trial. Each of them, including
Shenard, testified that Shenard sold cocaine base. Each of them
testified that neither Rodney nor Loletta were involved in the drug
business with Shenard.
The appellants do not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to
support their convictions. Therefore, any remaining facts necessary to
5
determine their appeals are set forth in our discussion of their claims.
The jury acquitted Shenard of the two obstruction of justice
counts, and we therefore do not recite the evidence introduced in
support of those charges. The jury found the appellants guilty as
charged on the remaining counts.
II. ANALYSIS
A. ADMISSION OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE OF DESTROYED LEDGERS
Loletta argues that the district court erred in overruling her
hearsay objections to the testimony of Joseph Antoine, a cooperating
witness. Antoine testified concerning his memory of the contents of
previously destroyed ledgers that purportedly contained information
regarding amounts of drugs he and his friend, Gerard Busby, sold to
Loletta. He also testified that he knew Loletta purchased drugs based
on representations Busby made to him. We review the district court’s
decision to allow admission of evidence for abuse of discretion. United
States v. Harrison, 178 F.3d 374, 379 (5th Cir. 1999).
Prior to the instant trial, Antoine, known as “Spider” on the
streets of Houston, pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to
distribute cocaine and cocaine base in the Southern District of Texas
in exchange for the government’s dismissal of three other counts in the
indictment against him. During the instant trial, Antoine testified
that pursuant to a plea agreement he had promised to “cooperate fully
and give full statements.” He further testified that he had not been
promised anything by either the Houston or Dallas United States
6
Attorney’s Office in exchange for his cooperation.
O
Outcome: For the above reasons, we VACATE Loletta Scott’s convictions and
REMAND for further proceedings. We AFFIRM the convictions of Rodney
Wells. Finally, we AFFIRM Shenard Wells’ sentence
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: