113602P.pdf   04/04/2014  United States  v.  Marcus Burrage
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  11-3602
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines   
   [PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Beam and Bye, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, 
   see U.S. v. Burrage, 687 F.3d 1015 (8th Cir. 2012). In light of the 
   Supreme Court's decision in Burrage v. United States, 134 S.Ct. 881 
   (2014), this court reverses Burrage's conviction for distribution of 
   heroin resulting in death; however, the evidence was sufficient to support 
   defendant's conviction for the lesser included offense of distribution of 
   heroin, and the court remands the case for entry of judgment and 
   resentencing on this offense; challenges to conviction on the first count 
   of the indictment, which charged distribution of heroin, are rejected for 
   the reasons set out in this court's prior opinion, but since the court 
   increased Burrage's offense level for both counts based on his conviction 
   for distribution of heroin resulting in death, the matter must be remanded 
   for resentencing on this count, as well. 
  
113602P.pdf   03/07/2014  United States  v.  Marcus Burrage
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  11-3602
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines   
   [PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Bye and Beam, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. On remand from the United States Supreme 
   Court, see Burrage v. United States, 134 S.Ct. 881 (2014). For this 
   court's prior opinion, see United States v. Burrage, 687 F.3d 1015 (8th 
   Cir. 2012). Under the Supreme Court's decision, where the government 
   conceded there was no evidence that the victim would have lived but for 
   his use of the heroin provided by the defendant, the evidence was 
   insufficient to support a conviction for distribution of heroin resulting 
   in death under 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(b)(1)(C); retrial of this count is 
   foreclosed by the Double Jeopardy Clause, and defendant's conviction on 
   the count is reversed; defendant's conviction on the remaining count is 
   affirmed for the reasons stated in the court's prior decision. 
  
113602P.pdf   08/06/2012  United States  v.  Marcus Burrage
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  11-3602
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines   
   [PUBLISHED] [Benton, Author, with Bye and Beam, Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - Criminal law. District court did not err in rejecting
   defendant's proximate cause instructions as this court has held that a
   showing of proximate cause is not required in a prosecution under 21
   U.S.C. Sec. 841(b)(1) for distributing heroin resulting in death; use of
   "contributing cause" language was appropriate under thi s court's case
   law; prosecutor's cross-examination of defendant and his closing
   comments as to whether the voice on a tape sounded like defendant were
   not improper; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction;
   even if a police officer's testimony regarding defendant's status as a drug
   dealer was hearsay, its admission was harmless in light of the other
   evidence in the case.