Record
Court opinion
1979-04-23
CourtListener (Free Law Project), text of the opinion
United States v. Barnes, 604 F.2d 121 (2d Cir. 1979)
Second Circuit opinion of 23 April 1979 affirming the 1978 narcotics convictions of Leroy Barnes, "a/k/a 'Nicky'," and ten co-defendants, including Barnes's conviction for a continuing criminal enterprise. Its statement of facts describes a DEA investigation begun in November 1976 into "drug traffic in Harlem and the South Bronx."
- Date
- 1979-04-23
- Kind
- court-opinion
- Retrieved
- 2026-10-12
- Docket
- Nos. 1045-1053, 1056, 1057; Dockets 78-1040, 1045, 1050, 1051, 1056, 1058-1061, 1063, 1067
- Rights
- Opinion of a United States court. Works of the federal judiciary are in the public domain in the United States (17 U.S.C. § 105; judicial opinions are not subject to copyright). The text was read on CourtListener.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued 22 June 1978, decided 23 April 1979, before Judges Moore, Van Graafeiland and Meskill; opinion by Judge Moore. Rehearing and rehearing en banc were denied on 18 June 1979, and Judge Meskill’s dissent is dated 22 June 1979. The appeal was from judgments entered on 19 and 23 January 1978 in the Southern District of New York “after a ten-week trial before the Honorable Henry F. Werker, District Judge, and a jury.”
The court states that the defendants “were convicted of conspiracy to violate the federal narcotics laws” (21 U.S.C. § 846) and of substantive counts, and that “defendant Barnes was convicted of engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise involving narcotics, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848.” On that count the opinion records a life sentence and a $100,000 fine. Its account of the investigation begins: “In November 1976 the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), in an effort to uncover sources of drug traffic in Harlem and the South Bronx, enlisted, for a financial consideration and witness protection, the services of” an informant, and it describes transactions at the Harlem River Motors Garage and other places in Harlem and the Bronx. For Barnes the court writes: “We affirm his convictions on Counts 1, 2 and 3.” The jury did not reach a verdict on one other defendant.
The main issue on appeal was the trial court’s decision to keep the names and addresses of prospective jurors from the parties and to limit questions about their backgrounds. The majority upheld it. Judge Meskill dissented: “the district court’s decision not to disclose the names and addresses of prospective jurors and at the same time to prohibit inquiry into their ethnic and religious backgrounds on the voir dire was error. I would reverse the judgments of conviction and remand for a new trial.”
The opinion’s description of an “organization” is the court’s summary of the trial evidence. This archive files no biography of Barnes or of any co-defendant beyond what the opinion states, and names no co-defendant here.