## Facts

- Customs and Border Protection received a tip that the freighter *Ana Cecilia* was returning to Miami with narcotics and searched the vessel on arrival but found none.
- After the search, law enforcement conducted surveillance of the vessel and shipyard.
- Agents observed two large boxes removed from the vessel area, moved by forklift, and loaded by unidentified men into a white Nissan.
- Terry Pierre Louis, an employee of the ship owner, drove the Nissan slowly through the shipyard while the owner walked alongside.
- There was no evidence Louis opened, handled, or inspected the boxes, or that he was present when they were removed from the vessel.
- At the shipyard gate, law enforcement vehicles blocked the exit; Louis exited the Nissan and fled but was later apprehended.
- Agents found two sealed boxes in the Nissan containing 111 bricks of cocaine.
- At trial, the government relied mainly on surveillance evidence of Louis’s proximity, his driving of the Nissan, and his flight; there was no direct evidence that Louis knew the boxes contained cocaine or any controlled substance.
- The jury convicted Louis of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and possession with intent to distribute cocaine; the district court denied Rule 29 motions for acquittal.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Louis knew the boxes he transported contained a controlled substance, as required for convictions under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846.
2. Whether circumstantial evidence of association, proximity, and flight permitted a reasonable inference of knowledge of a controlled substance rather than some other contraband.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit reversed the denial of Louis’s motion for judgment of acquittal and vacated his convictions.
- The court held the government failed to present sufficient evidence that Louis knew the boxes contained a controlled substance.
- The court concluded the evidence, even viewed favorably to the government, supported guilt and innocence nearly equally on the element of drug knowledge.
- Because the proof was legally insufficient on an essential element, the proper remedy was reversal with entry of a judgment of acquittal rather than a new trial.

## Legal Principles

- For offenses under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew the conduct involved a controlled substance, not merely unlawful or suspicious activity.
- A conviction cannot rest on speculation where the evidence provides equal or nearly equal circumstantial support for innocence and guilt on a required element; in that posture, reasonable doubt exists as a matter of law.
- Flight and “prudent smuggler” reasoning may support an inference that a defendant knew he was involved with illegal contraband, but they do not alone establish knowledge that the contraband was a controlled substance when other explanations remain equally supported.
- Mere presence, association with a suspected smuggler, or participation in otherwise ordinary work tasks is insufficient to prove knowledge of the drug nature of concealed cargo without additional evidence linking the defendant to awareness of that fact.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit set aside Louis’s drug convictions because the government’s circumstantial case—proximity to sealed boxes, employment association, driving the vehicle, and flight—did not permit a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Louis knew the boxes contained a controlled substance, an essential element under §§ 841 and 846.


United States v. Louis, 861 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2017)