State v. Cottrell

Ronald Cottrell (defendant) sold prescription narcotics to Eduardo Padron, an undercover detective. Padron texted Curtis asking to purchase eight oxycodone pills and 20 hydrocodone pills. Curtis said that her father had the product and told Padron to meet them at a convenience-store parking lot. Curtis and Padron arrived at the store. Curtis said that she was waiting on her father. Cottrell arrived, and Curtis talked to him. Curtis called and asked Padron to relocate to the post office. Padron refused and heard a male voice in the background say, “Fuck it, let’s just do it here.” Cottrell got in Padron’s vehicle and described the bottle as an “8 and 20.” Cottrell exchanged the bottle, which contained eight oxycodone pills and 20 hydrocodone pills, for $350 cash. Cottrell then spoke with Curtis. The charging document and the conspiracy jury instruction alleged five overt acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy: (1) Curtis responding to Padron’s text and arranging the meeting; (2) Curtis contacting Cottrell with the order and arranging the meeting; (3) Cottrell showing up at the store; (4) Curtis waiting by Cottrell’s vehicle during the transaction; and (5) Curtis meeting with Cottrell after the transaction. A jury convicted Cottrell of distributing of a controlled substance and conspiring to distribute a controlled substance. Cottrell appealed, arguing the jury instruction on conspiracy, containing five overt acts, presented either (1) a multiple-acts case requiring a unanimity instruction; or (2) an alternative-means problem, with insufficient evidence to support each one. The appellate court affirmed. Cottrell appealed.