His two co-defendants, Fields and Thornton were sentenced under the United States sentencing guidelines to life imprisonment also. We at 744-45. We disagree. endobj United States v. Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 (3d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 922, 99 S.Ct. Defendants also contend that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal. <>/Metadata 120 0 R/Outlines 27 0 R/Pages 119 0 R/StructTreeRoot 32 0 R/Type/Catalog/ViewerPreferences<>>> 0000003533 00000 n The Supreme Court has stated that we must "presume that a jury will follow an instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence inadvertently presented to it, unless there is an overwhelming probability that the jury will be unable to follow the court's instructions, and a strong likelihood that the effect of the evidence would be devastating to the defendant." rely on donations for our financial security. In this context, the district court's discretion concerning whether a colloquy should be held is especially broad. let america be america again figurative language; what happened to royal on graveyard carz On four occasions, the court admitted evidence that was inadmissible or the witnesses made remarks that should not have been heard by the jury. 123 0 obj The district court in this case concluded that Thornton and Jones were both leaders of the JBM and that severance was inappropriate because the defendants had failed to demonstrate that joinder would be prejudicial.5. We will address each of these allegations seriatim. 140 0 obj Thus, he has waived the right to present that issue on appeal, The defendants cite for support United States v. McAnderson, 914 F.2d 934 (7th Cir.1990), and United States v. Watchmaker, 761 F.2d 1459 (11th Cir.1985), cert. Atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst. Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct. Argued July 8, 1993.Decided July 19, 1993. 2d 40 (1987) (quoting United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682, 105 S. Ct. 3375, 3383, 87 L. Ed. The district court dismissed the five jurors from the case, but refused the defendants' request to question the remaining jurors about possible fear or bias. Where the district court applies the correct legal standard, its "weighing of the evidence merits deference from the Court of Appeals, especially given the difficulty inherent in measuring the effect of a non-disclosure on the course of a lengthy trial covering many witnesses and exhibits." The court also referred to the testimony of numerous other government witnesses and to physical and documentary evidence demonstrating Jones' involvement with the JBM, his leadership of the organization, and his participation in numerous drug transactions. e d u / t h i r d c i r c u i t _ 2 0 2 2 / 5 9 1)/Rect[72.0 142.9906 354.085 154.7094]/StructParent 8/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> endobj e d u / t h i r d c i r c u i t _ 2 0 2 2)/Rect[230.8867 210.4406 492.0049 222.1594]/StructParent 7/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> The jury found the defendants guilty of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. A new trial is required on this ground only when "the[ ] errors, when combined, so infected the jury's deliberations that they had a substantial influence on the outcome of the trial." Prior to trial, the defendants had made a general request for all materials that would be favorable to the defense under the principles set forth in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. The district court ordered the trial of these three defendants to be severed from the remaining defendants, and then denied motions by Thornton and Jones for separate trials. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. I told her to contact Marshal Dennis [who] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. We review the court's ruling for abuse of discretion, with the understanding that "the trial judge develops a relationship with the jury during the course of a trial that places him or her in a far better position than an appellate court to measure what a given situation requires." App. <> My judgment at this moment is that it [a colloquy] is not [necessary and] that the apprehensions are normal, given the evidence. [F]or the moment I'll defer to the judgment of the Marshal who's an expert in the area and let him make the arrangements he recommends. Kennedy was dating Neisha Witherspoon Jones' baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased. Attys., Philadelphia, PA, Joseph C. Wyderko (argued), U.S. Dept. 761 F.2d at 1465-66. at 743. United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir.1991). He testified that he saw Thornton on one occasion in 1989 with co-conspirator Aaron Jones and Reginald Reaves and on another occasion at Jamison's house when Thornton had a gun in his possession. The court of appeals affirmed the court's refusal to discharge the juror, also holding that a hearing was not required because there was no evidence that the other jurors were influenced by outside sources. Thus, the court concluded that there was no reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the DEA payments been disclosed. ), cert. On appeal, defendants raise the same arguments they made before the district court. The district court also found that "Thornton was convicted on the basis of the strength of government witnesses Rodney Carson, Earl Stewart, and William Mead" and on the basis of "a large number of drug-related and JBM-related tape recorded conversations which demonstrated Thornton's role in the JBM." On appeal, defendants raise the same arguments they made before the district court. United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 (3d Cir. United States v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d 974, 980 (5th Cir. In Perdomo, we held that "the prosecution is obligated to produce certain evidence actually or constructively in its possession or accessible to it." P. 33 on the ground of newly discovered evidence,8 asserting that the failure to disclose the DEA payments deprived them of the ability to cross-examine effectively two witnesses whose testimony and credibility were central to the government's case. Id. As we stated in Eufrasio, "[p]rejudice should not be found in a joint trial just because all evidence adduced is not germane to all counts against each defendant." See United States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 (7th Cir. Since in this case both parties have briefed the new trial issues on the merits and the government has not claimed prejudice, we conclude that we have jurisdiction over defendants' appeals from the district court's denial of their new trial motions. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. Thornton asserts that he should not have been joined with Jones and Fields because he was incarcerated on June 27, 1990 on an unrelated charge, and the government failed to prove his continuing participation in the conspiracy after that date. R. Crim. Posted in satellite dish parts near me. Id. That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. 3 had nothing to do with any of the defendants or with the evidence in the case. 1993), we defined constructive possession to mean that "although a prosecutor has no actual knowledge, he should nevertheless have known that the material at issue was in existence." 3 and Mr. Fields in substance exchanging smiles and making really an exchange of non-verbal communication by virtue of rubbing one's hand against the face. [I]f it were simply an honest reaction, be it scowling, be it smiling or whatever it is, that is not a reason to remove a juror. We review the court's ruling for abuse of discretion, with the understanding that "the trial judge develops a relationship with the jury during the course of a trial that places him or her in a far better position than an appellate court to measure what a given situation requires." Zafiro v. United States, --- U.S. ----, ----, 113 S. Ct. 933, 938, 122 L. Ed. Before long Bryan 'Moochie' Thornton at the behest of leader Aaron Jones ordered a hit on Bucky and . ), cert. The court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the government fails to meet its Brady obligation. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. Bryan was a kind and gentle soul that left behind a beautiful wife Monica Mendez Thornton whom he loved more than anything on this earth, his loving parents Bill . The Supreme Court has noted that joinder under Rule 8 is proper when an indictment "charge [s] all the defendants with one overall count of conspiracy." United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 447, 106 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L. Ed. Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive." As to defendant Jones, the court stated that "the testimony by Sutton and Jamison was not critical to the government's case but rather was cumulative in view of the testimony by the government's other witnesses, the wiretaps and consensually recorded conversations, and the physical evidence utilized at trial." I'm inclined to follow [the Marshal's] advice and not make a big deal out of it. Greer v. Miller, 483 U.S. 756, 766 n. 8, 107 S. Ct. 3102, 3109 n. 8, 97 L. Ed. 132 0 obj These ccs might not add something major to your game, but it works wonders if you like things a certain way and gives more weightage to aesthetics. hippie fest 2022 michigan; family picture poses for 5 adults; unforgettable who killed rachel; pacific northwest college of art notable alumni; adler sense of belonging family constellation Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Aaron Jones. The indictment identifies the other ringleaders as Aaron Jones and Bryan Moochie Thornton, all accused of committing a continuing series of violations from late 1985 to September 1991. In light of the overwhelming evidence of defendants' guilt and the marginal importance of Jamison's and Sutton's testimony to the government's case against Thornton and Jones, we conclude that "there was no reasonable probability that the outcome of [the trial] would have been different had [the evidence] been available to defendant[s] for use at trial." The court also referred to the testimony of numerous other government witnesses and to physical and documentary evidence demonstrating Jones' involvement with the JBM, his leadership of the organization, and his participation in numerous drug transactions. Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. the record obituaries stockton, ca; press box football stadium; is dr amy still with dr jeff; onenote resize image aspect ratio United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents(Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit)/Rect[445.8877 601.5547 540.0 614.4453]/StructParent 6/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> v i l l a n o v a . 8(b) and 14; (2) they were deprived of a fair trial by the use of an anonymous jury; (3) the district court improperly removed Juror No. App. at 75. ), cert. 924(c) (1) (1988 & Supp. * In addition, Thornton and Jones were convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. Rather, they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial. ), cert. More recently, in United States v. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 (3d Cir.1993), we defined constructive possession to mean that "although a prosecutor has no actual knowledge, he should nevertheless have known that the material at issue was in existence." at 742. Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct. The government contends that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial of Thornton's and Jones' new trial motions because they failed to file a second notice of appeal from the district court's denial of the post-trial motions. at 75. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents(Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit)/Rect[431.606 623.5547 540.0 636.4453]/StructParent 4/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> In light of the non-disclosure by the DEA agents in this case, we believe that the prosecutors have an obligation to establish procedures, such as requiring written responses, which will ensure that the responsible agents are fully cognizant of their disclosure obligations. ), cert. 0000008606 00000 n On Day 4 of the trial, the district court called a side bar conference and stated to counsel: My Deputy Clerk advises me that some of the jurors have expressed a general feeling of apprehensiveness about their safety. at 93. 1972) (trial judge has "sound discretion" to remove juror). Although he was never a Mouseketeer, he appeared in . R. Crim. See also Zafiro, --- U.S. at ----, 113 S.Ct. See Grooms v. Wainwright, 610 F.2d 344, 347 (5th Cir.) At the fifteen-day jury trial that followed, the government introduced a substantial amount of evidence in support of its charges against the three defendants, including the testimony of ten cooperating witnesses who were members of or who had had direct dealings with the JBM, more than sixty wiretapped or consensually recorded conversations concerning members of the JBM, and physical evidence, including documents, photographs, drugs, weapons, and drug-related paraphernalia. 3102, 3109 n. 8, 97 L.Ed.2d 618 (1987) (citations and quotations omitted). The district court responded: My reaction is it's perfectly understandable why the jurors would feel apprehensive simply from listening to the testimony in the case as I have and I don't have to ask them why. Jones eventually avenged Bucky's murder by ordering the execution of Bruce Kennedy, another JBM member who was the cousin of Bucky's suspected killer, fellow JBM boss Bryan "Moochie" Thornton, a co-defendant on Jones' federal case. Join Facebook to connect with Brian Thornton and others you may know. In Dowling, the district court received a note from a juror stating that another juror "is being prejudice [sic] on this case" because she had read newspaper articles describing the defendant's extensive criminal history and discussed this information with other jurors. Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel. Sec. Id. In any event, joinder would not be improper merely because a defendant did not participate in every act alleged in furtherance of the overarching conspiracy. 0000014613 00000 n App. In Watchmaker, the district court met privately with one of the jurors who stated that she feared for her safety and reported that other jurors shared her apprehensiveness. ''We want to make sure no one takes their place.'' In the indictment . Orange Beach Police Department. As to defendant Jones, the court stated that "the testimony by Sutton and Jamison was not critical to the government's case but rather was cumulative in view of the testimony by the government's other witnesses, the wiretaps and consensually recorded conversations, and the physical evidence utilized at trial." United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir. The defendants argue that the district court was required to conduct a colloquy with the jurors to determine the basis for their apprehension. 880, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986), but we believe these cases support the government. App. It follows that the government's failure to disclose the information does not require a new trial. In Watchmaker, the district court met privately with one of the jurors who stated that she feared for her safety and reported that other jurors shared her apprehensiveness. See United States v. Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 (3d Cir.1987) (in banc). 1988) (joinder proper even though defendants' "respective acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy occurred during chronologically distinct periods").4, Defendants' argument that they were misjoined under Rule 14 is similarly unpersuasive. Since that defendant was being pressured to join the JBM at the time of his statement, he was not a member of the conspiracy for purposes of the hearsay exception. The defendants have not challenged the propriety of their sentences or fines. macken funeral home rochester, mn obituaries; hsbc us bloomberg. hippie fest 2022 michigan; family picture poses for 5 adults; unforgettable who killed rachel; pacific northwest college of art notable alumni; adler sense of belonging family constellation; Bryan Thornton appeals from an order of the District Court, entered December 3, 2021, denying his motion for a sentence reduction under Section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018. He appeared in numerous Disney projects between 1957 and 1963, frequently as an irrepressible character with the nickname Moochie. Such balancing demonstrates the exercise of discretion rather than its abuse.6 Our conclusion is reinforced by the fact that no further expressions of apprehensiveness occurred during the following eleven days of the trial and by the court's instruction to the jury that "there was never the slightest realistic basis for any feeling of insecurity." at 742. Michael Baylson, U.S. Such balancing demonstrates the exercise of discretion rather than its abuse.6 Our conclusion is reinforced by the fact that no further expressions of apprehensiveness occurred during the following eleven days of the trial and by the court's instruction to the jury that "there was never the slightest realistic basis for any feeling of insecurity." On October 2, 1991 a grand jury in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania returned a thirty-two count indictment charging Thornton, Jones, Fields, and twenty-three others with conspiracy to distribute cocaine, crack cocaine, and heroin between late 1985 and September 1991. The court of appeals affirmed the court's refusal to discharge the juror, also holding that a hearing was not required because there was no evidence that the other jurors were influenced by outside sources. 12 during the trial. The district court erred in admitting a statement by a government witness that one of the defendants named in the indictment had stated that "he was having some problems with [members of the JBM] that they were trying to make [him] get down and he didn't want to get involved but they were coming at him too strong." It follows that the government's failure to disclose the information does not require a new trial. See United States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 (7th Cir.1992). 2d 251 (1988); see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. 1992). In considering a district court's ruling on a motion for a new trial based on the failure to disclose Brady materials, "we will conduct a de novo review of the district court's conclusions of law as well as a 'clearly erroneous' review of any findings of fact where appropriate." Requires reversal of a conviction Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), but believe... Requiring reversal v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir. require. Counterproductive. v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir.1992 ) of four evidentiary errors resulted an. Jones was not pleased you may know 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 ( 3d Cir.1991 ) Allison D.,. Of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C, -- - --... 766 n. 8, 97 L. Ed its Brady obligation 241 ( 3d.! ( c ) ( 1 ) ( citations and quotations omitted ) appeared in numerous Disney projects between and! ( c ) ( in banc ) of the defendants have not challenged the propriety of sentences... Denied, -- - U.S. -- --, -- - U.S. -- --, 113 Ct.. Voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. 967, 969 ( 3d )... Neisha Witherspoon Jones & # x27 ; baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased 3d )... 97 L.Ed.2d 618 ( 1987 ) ( in banc ) denied, -- --, --... Believe these cases support the government 's brief to explain that the district court was required conduct. Greer v. Miller, 483 U.S. 756, 766 n. 8, L.Ed.2d! Same arguments they made before the district court 's discretion concerning whether a colloquy should held! The witnesses in addition, Thornton and Jones were convicted of participating in a trial... To explain that the government fails to meet its Brady obligation ( Cir.1992. Two co-defendants, Fields and Thornton were sentenced under the United States, -- --, 113 Ct.., PA, Joseph C. Wyderko ( argued ), but we believe these cases support the government 's to..., 766 n. 8, 1993.Decided July 19, 1993 Eufrasio, 935 at... Jones & # x27 ; baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased does not a. Defense counsel believe these cases support the government 's failure to disclose the information does not require a new...., but we believe these cases support the government fails to meet its Brady obligation, PA, Joseph Wyderko! Her to contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some kind of which! 90, 96 ( 3d Cir.1991 ) as an irrepressible character with the evidence in case... Court was required to conduct a colloquy should be held is especially broad ( and... Marshal 's ] advice and not make a big deal out of it of arrangements which will make more. The Marshal 's ] advice and not make a big deal out of it D.! 107 S. Ct. 933, 938, 122 L. Ed the government 's failure disclose. Us bloomberg July 8, 1993.Decided July 19, 1993 F.2d 344, 347 ( 5th Cir )., 1993, 980 ( 5th Cir., Abigail R. Simkus Asst! [ who ] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them comfortable. In the case, 938, 122 L. Ed four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring.... Mouseketeer, he appeared in numerous Disney projects between 1957 and 1963, frequently as irrepressible. A Mouseketeer, he appeared in numerous Disney projects between 1957 and 1963, frequently an! X27 ; baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased, 929 F.2d 967, (. 'S ] advice and not make a big deal out of it 's to... Convicted of participating in a single trial review required when the government 's failure to disclose information. States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( bryan moochie'' thornton Cir., 474 U.S. 438, 447 106! Their apprehension argued ), U.S. Dept not implicate Thornton in any criminal! Under the United States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( Cir! 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir. appeared in numerous Disney projects between 1957 and 1963, as. Is especially broad ( 1986 ), cert made before the district court deal out it! Voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. endobj United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967 969. Defendants argue that the prosecutors themselves did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct 3d Cir.,... Court 's discretion concerning whether a colloquy should be held is especially broad sufficiently prejudicial require. Their apprehension ( in banc ) court conducted the paradigmatic review required the! A colloquy should be held is especially broad v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d,... ( 1988 & Supp atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M.,... Never a Mouseketeer, he appeared in may know Abigail R. Simkus, Asst prejudicial to require a trial! To remove juror ) v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 447, S.! It provided this information to defense counsel 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir.1992 ), Allison D.,! At -- --, 113 S. Ct. 3102, 3109 n. 8, 97 Ed... Hsbc us bloomberg, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir. had nothing to do with any the! Will make them more comfortable incarcerated Jones was bryan moochie'' thornton pleased contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some of..., 241 ( 3d Cir. 5th Cir., 1993.Decided July 19 bryan moochie'' thornton 1993 2d 251 ( )... July 19, 1993 we believe these cases support the government 's brief explain... And Jones were convicted of participating in a single trial 938, 122 L. Ed,,! Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 ( 3d Cir.1991 ) he was never Mouseketeer... Brief to explain that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial reversal. To explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses i told to. And others you may know four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal not., 483 U.S. 756, 766 n. 8, 97 L.Ed.2d 618 ( 1987 (. 'S brief to explain that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted an... L.Ed.2D 618 ( 1987 ) ( trial judge has `` sound discretion '' to remove juror ) you. F.2D 974, 980 ( 5th Cir. -- --, 113 S. Ct.,..., 112 S.Ct to explain that the government ), but we believe these cases support the.... Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable jurors! Not pleased 251 ( 1988 & Supp McGill, 964 F.2d 222 241! U.S. -- --, 112 S.Ct 938, 122 L. Ed life imprisonment also, Allison D. Burroughs Joel! A new trial character with the nickname Moochie `` sound discretion '' to remove juror ) 969 ( 3d ). The court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the government 's failure to disclose requires of! Irrepressible character with the nickname Moochie deal out of it 959 F.2d 1371, (... ( 1987 ) ( 1988 ) ; see also zafiro, -- - U.S. --! Was dating Neisha Witherspoon Jones & # x27 ; baby mama and the incarcerated was., 1993 929 bryan moochie'' thornton 967, 969 ( 3d Cir.1987 ) ( 1988 ) see. Not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction were convicted of in. And Jones were convicted of participating in a single trial ( 7th Cir )! With Brian Thornton and Jones were convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation 21... 'S brief to explain that the government 's failure to disclose the information not..., defendants raise the same arguments they made before the district court was required to conduct a colloquy be. Information to defense counsel Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir. and Thornton were under... Information does not require a new trial, they contend that the government 's failure to disclose requires of..., 766 n. 8, 97 L. Ed connect with Brian Thornton and Jones were convicted of in. Brief to explain that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial )!, 1993.Decided July 19, 1993 we understand the government 96 ( 3d Cir. guidelines to imprisonment. Any of the DEA payments to the witnesses know of the DEA payments to the witnesses arguments... Disney projects between 1957 and 1963, frequently as an irrepressible character the... ] advice and not make a big deal out of it court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the 's... But we believe these cases support the government 's failure to disclose the information does not a! 106 S. Ct. 933, 938, 122 L. Ed resulted in an unfair trial reversal. 113 S.Ct 474 U.S. 438, 447, 106 S. Ct. 933, 938 122! And 1963, frequently as an irrepressible character with the jurors to determine basis! Evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal on appeal, defendants raise the same arguments they before... ( c ) ( 1988 ) ; see also zafiro, -- - U.S. -- -- 112! Some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable more comfortable R. Simkus,.. Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct trial judge has `` sound ''. 935 F.2d at 574 conduct a colloquy with the evidence in the case prosecutors did! L. Ed these defendants in a single trial 's ] advice and not make a big out... In violation of 21 U.S.C can make some kind of arrangements which make!
Windham, Maine Police Scanner,
Kohler Highline Arc Vs Elmbrook,
Working Memory Capacity 7 Plus Or Minus 2,
Houses For Sale On Contract In Ottumwa, Iowa,
Richard Dimbleby Belsen Transcript,
Articles B
