## Facts

- The federal government indicted Dante Angelo Grassi and six other individuals in the Southern District of Florida for offenses tied to a drug- and firearms-smuggling operation.
- Count 1 charged Grassi and others with conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and to possess, transfer, and transport unregistered firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.
- At trial, the government’s proof came mainly from undercover federal agents’ testimony and recordings of agents’ conversations with members of the group during the charged period.
- In late April 1978, undercover agents posing as narcotics and firearms smugglers met with Charles Watson at Watson’s business in Homestead, Florida.
- Watson agreed to help the agents import and distribute an expected large shipment of marijuana and to obtain guns and silencers for the agents’ alleged narcotics trade.
- About a week later, Watson introduced the agents to associates who participated in planning the importation effort and in negotiating and completing various drug and firearms transactions.
- In mid-May 1978, Watson introduced the agents to Grassi. Grassi showed interest in the importation venture and said he would work with the agents if their references checked out.
- From mid-May through late November, Watson and other participants met regularly with the agents to plan the marijuana importation and to discuss or carry out drug and firearms deals; Grassi did not attend those regular meetings.
- Grassi met with the agents and one of Watson’s associates once more, on July 27. At that meeting, Grassi discussed providing protection if the agents imported marijuana using their own plane and said he could arrange a cocaine purchase. The conversation then moved to other matters; Grassi remained present but did not participate further.
- A jury convicted the defendants on the counts submitted to it. Grassi appealed his Count 1 conspiracy conviction to the Fifth Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Grassi knowingly and voluntarily joined the charged conspiracy in Count 1.
2. Whether trying Grassi jointly with multiple codefendants and counts was improper or so prejudicial that the district court was required to sever his trial.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed Grassi’s Count 1 conspiracy conviction.
- The court held the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, permitted a reasonable jury to find that Grassi knowingly associated himself with the unlawful objectives and agreed to participate.
- The court rejected Grassi’s challenge to the joint trial, concluding joinder was permissible for defendants and offenses arising from the same series of acts, and that Grassi did not show prejudice requiring severance.

## Legal Principles

- On sufficiency review, an appellate court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and asks whether a reasonable jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
- A conspiracy may be proved by circumstantial evidence, including a defendant’s statements and conduct that show knowledge of the scheme’s essential purpose and voluntary participation.
- A defendant may join a conspiracy after it begins; participation need not be continuous, and the defendant need not attend every meeting or take part in every transaction to be liable.
- Mere presence at a meeting or association with conspirators, without evidence of knowing agreement, is not enough; however, presence combined with statements or actions supporting the plan may support an inference of agreement.
- Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 8, defendants and counts may be tried together when they are connected by the same series of acts or transactions, such as a single continuing drug-and-weapons scheme.
- Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 14, severance is warranted only upon a strong showing of actual prejudice; limiting instructions and the jury’s ability to separate proof among defendants can defeat claims of spillover prejudice.

## Conclusion

United States v. Grassi held that, even though Grassi had limited face-to-face contact with undercover agents and was absent from many meetings, the recorded conversations and his own statements about providing protection and arranging drug activity were enough for a jury to find he knowingly joined the charged drug-and-firearms conspiracy, and the Fifth Circuit found no reversible error in the joint trial structure.


United States v. Grassi, 616 F.2d 1295 (1980)