United States of America v. Darren D. Duncan

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-3307
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Darren D. Duncan
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln
____________
Submitted: July 30, 2026
Filed: August 4, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, L.R. SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Darren Duncan appeals challenging the sufficiency of the evidence after a jury
found him guilty of distributing fentanyl and the district court1 imposed a sentence
1 The Honorable Susan M. Bazis, United States District Judge for the District
of Nebraska.

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
within the United States Sentencing Guidelines range. Having jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
Upon careful review, this court finds no basis for reversal. See United States
v. Oliver, 90 F.4th 1222, 1224–25 (8th Cir. 2024) (standard of review). In light of
the evidence presented at trial—including the witness testimony, text messages, and
autopsy report—this court concludes that a rational trier of fact could have found
beyond a reasonable doubt that Duncan knowingly gave the victim a controlled
substance. See United States v. Campbell, 986 F.3d 782, 809 (8th Cir. 2021)
(describing elements to sustain conviction for distribution of a controlled substance);
United States v. Cooper, 990 F.3d 576, 582 (8th Cir. 2021) (government does not
need to prove that defendant knew the exact nature of the substance in possession,
“only that it was a controlled substance of some kind”); United States v. Cheshier,
134 F.4th 534, 538 (8th Cir. 2025) (defendant distributed fentanyl to victim where
text messages showed he discussed distributing fentanyl with the victim, defendant
stated in body camera footage that he suggested to victim that they do drugs, and,
after defendant offered victim pills from his bag, victim grabbed them and took too
many).
The judgment is affirmed.
______________________________

-- 2 of 2 --