United States v. Olvera

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“First, there was evidence that the quantity of cocaine found was “very unusual” in the context of the prison setting and that prison authorities almost never found any narcotics in that quantity. Second, evidence of resale value of the drug may support an inference of intent to distribute. Here the evidence showed that procaine found with the cocaine could be used to dilute the latter so that it would be possible to make approximately 260 “bindles” of 15% pure cocaine that would sell for $10 each in the institution. From the evidence it would be reasonable for the jury to infer that the resale value of the cocaine was $2,600. The figure is significant and the jury could conclude that the cocaine was not possessed merely for “personal use.” Third, whether the defendant is addicted to the drug found in his possession is another consideration in determining whether there was sufficient evidence of intent to distribute. A finding of addiction may support an inference that a larger quantity of the drug may be kept for personal use. Here, however, the defendant testified that he was a heroin addict and that he did not like to use cocaine. The amount of the cocaine seized, in light of these, additional circumstances, provided relevant evidence from which the jury could properly find or infer, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellant possessed the cocaine with the intent to distribute it.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including United States v. Franklin