## Facts

- Melvin David Towns, Jr. was charged with conspiracy to manufacture 500 grams or more of methamphetamine and to possess and distribute pseudoephedrine knowing it would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846.
- A Texas Department of Public Safety officer investigated a suspected methamphetamine scheme involving “smurfing,” in which participants purchased pseudoephedrine at multiple pharmacies.
- The officer obtained pseudoephedrine purchase logs from several pharmacy chains (including Walgreens, Wal-Mart, Target, and CVS), receiving records in electronic and hard-copy formats.
- The officer and an analyst compiled the pharmacy data into a consolidated spreadsheet tracking purchases attributed to suspected conspirators across stores.
- At trial, the government introduced the pharmacy logs and the spreadsheet to show a pattern of purchases consistent with participation in the conspiracy.
- The logs were accompanied by custodian certifications/affidavits and were introduced through the investigating officer’s testimony rather than live testimony from pharmacy records custodians.
- Co-conspirators testified that Towns repeatedly purchased pseudoephedrine for the conspiracy; Towns testified and denied involvement and challenged the reliability of the records.
- The jury convicted Towns, and the district court imposed a 120-month mandatory minimum sentence, denying safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) based on a finding that Towns did not truthfully provide all information concerning the offense.

## Issues

1. Whether pseudoephedrine purchase logs kept by pharmacies pursuant to regulatory requirements, and a law-enforcement-created spreadsheet compiling them, were admissible under the business-records exception (Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)).
2. Whether admitting the logs and compilation through certifications and an officer’s testimony, without calling pharmacy custodians to testify, violated the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.
3. Whether the district court erred in denying safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5) for failure to truthfully and completely disclose offense-related information.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the pharmacy pseudoephedrine logs were admissible as business records under Rule 803(6), notwithstanding that they were kept to comply with legal requirements.
- The court upheld admission of the consolidated spreadsheet as a compilation derived from properly admitted records.
- The court held admission of the logs and related materials did not violate the Confrontation Clause because the records were non-testimonial business records and could be authenticated through certifications.
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the sentence, concluding the district court did not reversibly err in denying safety-valve relief based on Towns’s failure to satisfy the truthful-disclosure requirement.

## Legal Principles

- Records created and kept as part of a business’s regular operations may qualify as business records under Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) even when the business maintains them to satisfy statutory or regulatory obligations.
- A compilation or summary may be admissible when it is derived from admissible underlying records and does not introduce unreliability beyond the source data.
- Non-testimonial business records generally fall outside the Confrontation Clause’s bar on admitting testimonial hearsay without cross-examination; authentication by custodian certification can be sufficient when the record is non-testimonial.
- Safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5) requires the defendant to truthfully provide the government all information and evidence concerning the offense and related conduct; the district court’s credibility findings and completeness determinations receive substantial deference on appeal.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit upheld Towns’s conviction and mandatory-minimum sentence, ruling that pharmacy pseudoephedrine logs were admissible as non-testimonial business records, that a compilation spreadsheet based on those records could be admitted, and that denial of safety-valve relief was supported by the district court’s finding that Towns did not truthfully and completely disclose offense information.


United States v. Towns, 718 F.3d 404 (5th Cir. 2013)