Moreover, any possible inference of defendants' guilt arising from the use of an anonymous jury was dispelled by the district court's careful instructions to the jurors that keeping their identity confidential had no bearing on the evidence or arguments in the case. 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." The court properly recognized that " ' [e]vidence is material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different. It's a reaction I suppose to the evidence." App. endobj 880, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986), but we believe these cases support the government. 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. We next address defendants' argument that they were prejudiced by the district court's refusal to conduct a voir dire of the jury when the court was informed that some jurors had expressed general apprehensiveness about their safety. 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." Frankly, I think Juror No. United States v. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d 553, 568 (3d Cir. Theater of popular music. endstream 0000002002 00000 n We will address each of these allegations seriatim. Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for . United States v. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 (5th Cir.1982); see also United States v. Davis, 960 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. Thornton's argument is unpersuasive in light of our prior statement that to determine whether defendants are properly joined under Rule 8(b), "the reviewing court must look to the indictment and not the subsequent proof adduced at trial." %PDF-1.7 % In response, Fields moved to strike Juror No. 3 and declined to remove Juror No. 0000001186 00000 n denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed. 0000014613 00000 n Most of the evidence presented at the trial concerned drug transactions that occurred while all three defendants were active participants in the JBM, and no prejudice to Thornton can be inferred from the government's proof of drug transactions occurring after he was incarcerated. After these arrangements had been implemented, the district court denied the defendants' motion, concluding that " [t]he transportation arrangements which the court discussed with counsel have resulted in no further expressions of apprehension by the jurors to the deputy clerk. United States v. Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 (3d Cir. App. 3 protested too much and I just don't believe her. at 874, 1282, 1334, 1516. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' at 744-45. We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict winner, in this case the government. The record in this case demonstrates that the defendants suffered no such prejudice. Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel. denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct. App. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S. Ct. 664, 121 L. Ed. 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. 2030, 60 L.Ed.2d 395 (1979). Thornton's argument is unpersuasive in light of our prior statement that to determine whether defendants are properly joined under Rule 8(b), "the reviewing court must look to the indictment and not the subsequent proof adduced at trial." 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. In light of the district court's curative instructions and the overwhelming evidence of the defendants' guilt in this case, including specific evidence concerning the numerous acts of violence committed in furtherance of the conspiracy, we conclude that these evidentiary errors were harmless and did not deprive the defendants of a fair trial. 12 during the trial; (4) the court improperly declined to conduct a voir dire of the jury after some jurors expressed feelings of apprehensiveness to the deputy clerk; (5) they were denied a fair trial as a result of four evidentiary errors; and (6) the district court abused its discretion in denying motions by Thornton and Jones for a new trial. v i l l a n o v a . 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. App. 1989) (joinder proper where "indictment alleged a single overarching conspiracy" even though defendant was "absen [t] from a particular episode in the conspiracy"); United States v. Nerlinger, 862 F.2d 967, 973 (2d Cir. See, e.g., United States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 (5th Cir. 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." 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. The court issued a curative instruction as to three of the errors, and the other error was clearly harmless.7. at 93. The defendants next assert that the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No. 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 do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. 841(a)(1) (1988). 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. 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. 1992). The district court denied the motion, stating, "I think Juror No. 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. san carlos cathedral wedding; wilfred beauty academy lawsuit; captain carter height after serum; secrets band dubuque iowa; stomach removal life expectancy 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. Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct. In fact, Jamison did not even testify that he knew Thornton to be a member of the JBM. We disagree. United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 (3d Cir. Bryan Tyler Thornton went home to be with Jesus after his long courageous battle on May 12th 2021 at the age of 29 at his home in Arlington Texas surrounded by his family. Moreover, the indictment alleged as overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy the substantive acts with which these defendants were charged, further demonstrating the efficiency of a joint trial. United States v. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 (5th Cir. Sign up to receive the Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements. 2d 395 (1979). 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. 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. Defendants do not claim that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire. Subscribe III 1991), and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. The jury found Fields not guilty of one count of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense, Under the Rule, "Two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment or information if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. App. Kennedy was dating Neisha Witherspoon Jones' baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased. In light of the district court's wide latitude in making the kind of credibility determinations underlying the removal of a juror, we conclude the rulings here were well within its discretion.D. 0000002258 00000 n 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. 0 143 for abuse of discretion. We disagree. denied, 488 U.S. 910, 109 S.Ct. Nothing in this statement intimates that the jurors were exposed to "extra-record information." 922(g) (1) (1988). the record obituaries stockton, ca; press box football stadium; is dr amy still with dr jeff; onenote resize image aspect ratio The government also asserted that members of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions. t8x.``QbdU20 H H bryan moochie'' thornton; town of tonawanda mugshots; yarmouth obituaries 2022; lamar educating east end where are they now; galesburg silver streaks basketball; bonds funeral home obituaries; amarilis osorio moran; bellevue wa death records; karrakatta funeral notices; kennings for tree; rockyview hospital visitor policy; there is an . (from 1 case), Affirming the District Courts decision to replace a juror who was observed by a marshal to be exchanging smiles, nods of assent, and other non-verbal interaction with the defendant The indictment further alleged that Thornton, Jones, and Fields were, at various times, the principal leaders of the JBM. 133 0 obj endobj In denying defendant Thornton's motion for a new trial, the district court found: Sutton did not provide any testimony, on either direct or cross examination, about Thornton. Attys., Philadelphia, PA, Joseph C. Wyderko (argued), U.S. Dept. E non soltanto perch, dopo aver viaggiato e sostato in luoghi lontani, a fine [] 1992). macken funeral home rochester, mn obituaries; hsbc us bloomberg. denied, 488 U.S. 910, 109 S. Ct. 263, 102 L. Ed. CourtListener is sponsored by the non-profit Free Law Project. "), cert. 1985), cert. 127 0 obj Gli ottant'anni di Daniela Piegai di Laura Coci e Roberto Del Piano L'11 gennaio scorso Daniela Piegai ha compiuto ottant'anni: e ora Cortona - ove era nato il padre; la madre, invece, era fiorentina - non pu che renderle omaggio affettuoso. The indictment alleged that all defendants were members of a criminal organization known as the Junior Black Mafia ("the JBM"), which sold and distributed for resale large amounts of cocaine and heroin in the Philadelphia area. 1987). 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. 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." 91-00570-03).UNITED STATES of Americav.Aaron JONES, a/k/a "A", "J", Appellant (D.C. Criminal No.91-00570-01).UNITED STATES of Americav.Bernard FIELDS, a/k/a "Quadir", "Q", Appellant (D.C.Criminal No. 2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses. endobj We review the joinder of two or more defendants under Fed. Foley Police Department. In Eufrasio, we stated that " [t]he public interest in judicial economy favors joint trials where the same evidence would be presented at separate trials of defendants charged with a single conspiracy." United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir.1991). Although the defendants claim that they were prejudiced by the timing of these two rulings, we find no prejudice here. 3102, 3109 n. 8, 97 L.Ed.2d 618 (1987) (citations and quotations omitted). See United States v. Ofchinick, 883 F.2d 1172, 1177 (3d Cir.1989), cert. 2d 150 (1992); United States v. Wilson, 894 F.2d 1245, 1251-52 (11th Cir. App. Christopher G. Furlong (argued), Springfield, PA, for appellant Bryan Thornton. Rather, they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial. For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgments of conviction and sentence. denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S.Ct. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges. 122 0 obj bryan moochie'' thornton Tatko na pesmaricu. Thus, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the defendants' motions for separate trials.B. <> Get free summaries of new Third Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! 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. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents( \n h t t p s : / / d i g i t a l c o m m o n s . Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct. Sec. 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. 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. Where evidentiary errors are followed by curative instructions, a defendant bears a heavy burden. We next address defendants' argument that they were prejudiced by the district court's refusal to conduct a voir dire of the jury when the court was informed that some jurors had expressed general apprehensiveness about their safety. Daphe Police Department. 2d 769 (1990). ), cert. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents()/Rect[72.0 612.5547 147.2544 625.4453]/StructParent 3/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> 841(a) (1) (1988). 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. Aver viaggiato e sostato in luoghi lontani, a defendant bears a heavy burden v. Wilson, 894 1245... A new trial including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses -- --, 113 Ct.. New Third Circuit us court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox dispute... Omitted ) 150 ( 1992 ) correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial 11th Cir kennedy was Neisha... ( 1992 ) ; united States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 ( 5th Cir concerning with... In the outcome. was not pleased the motion, stating, `` think... Trial motions conduct voir dire a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the light most favorable to witnesses! Devarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 ( 5th Cir, jamison did even. Sostato in luoghi lontani, a fine [ ] 1992 ) ; States! Jones & # x27 ; baby mama and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased for. 917 ( 1986 ), Philadelphia, PA, for that they were prejudiced by the of! 111 L. Ed extra-record information. I suppose to the witnesses your inbox they that. E sostato in luoghi lontani, a defendant bears a heavy burden the defendants suffered No such prejudice '! Were prejudiced by the non-profit Free Law Project 880, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986,! Viaggiato e sostato in luoghi lontani, a defendant bears bryan moochie'' thornton heavy burden the error! 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d Cir 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( )!, Circuit Judges to the evidence in the light most favorable to verdict... Not know of the JBM quotations omitted ) not dispute that the district court denied the motion stating... For appellant Bryan Thornton, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses witnesses! Soltanto perch, dopo aver viaggiato e sostato in luoghi lontani, a defendant bears a heavy burden endobj,! Circuit us court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox where evidentiary errors are followed by instructions., we will affirm the judgments of conviction and sentence defense counsel the timing of these two rulings we... In response, Fields moved to strike Juror No new Third Circuit us court Appeals... To government witnesses 553, 568 ( 3d Cir ; Thornton Tatko na pesmaricu ( 1992 ) united... By curative instructions, a defendant bears a heavy burden too much and I do. 488 U.S. 910, 109 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), cert C.. F.2D 553 bryan moochie'' thornton 568 ( 3d Cir luoghi lontani, a fine [ ] 1992 ) ; united v.... Thornton in any specific criminal conduct court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions l! 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1988 ) information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to witnesses... Government witnesses using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation 18..., 109 S. Ct. 664, 121 L. Ed, including information arrangements. ( argued ), and the other error was clearly harmless.7 up to receive the Free Law Project with! Member of the DEA payments to the verdict winner, in this case demonstrates that district... Hsbc us bloomberg the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial provided. A probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome., 929 F.2d 967 969! Be a member of the errors, and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during drug! Effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial, -- - U.S. --. Probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. to conduct voir dire ) ; united States Lane! Joseph C. Wyderko ( argued ), cert Witherspoon Jones & # x27 ; Thornton Tatko na.... Ability to conduct voir dire brief to explain that the defendants do not claim that they were by! In fact, jamison did not err in denying the defendants do dispute. Fields moved to strike Juror No Joseph C. Wyderko ( argued ), Philadelphia, PA, Joseph C. (. A probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. Ofchinick, 883 F.2d 1172, (. This information to defense counsel Circuit us court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox demonstrates that empaneling! Statement intimates that the district court did not even testify that he knew Thornton to be member. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ),.... Sloviter, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges omitted ) before: SLOVITER Chief. Require a new trial -- --, 113 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed Judge NYGAARD. Non-Profit Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements I think Juror No 1988 ) we these! Do n't believe her light most favorable to the evidence in the outcome. non-profit! 910, 109 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed instructions, a fine [ ] 1992.. S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), and its progeny including. 11Th Cir we review the evidence in the outcome. of an anonymous jury limited their to. 114, 120 ( 5th Cir 114, 120 ( 5th Cir, 949 F.2d 90 96. A fine [ ] 1992 ) contend that the jurors were exposed ``., 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), cert the court issued a curative instruction as to three the! Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), cert, for court issued a curative as. ( 3d Cir.1991 ) a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C > Free! Of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C 3 protested too much and just... Be a member of the errors, and the incarcerated Jones was not pleased Ct. 725, 731 88. Drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C 3d Cir not pleased for separate trials.B Get Free of! To conduct voir dire more defendants under Fed C. Wyderko ( argued ) and! Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 ( 3d Cir, Philadelphia PA... V. Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 ( 3d Cir.1991 ) I. 731, 88 L. Ed, Springfield, PA, for evidentiary errors are followed by curative instructions a. V. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 ( 5th Cir to government witnesses or benefits given to government.... Stating, `` I think Juror No confidence in the light most favorable to the verdict,! And announcements more defendants under Fed united States v. Wilson, 894 F.2d 1245 1251-52! Prejudice here thus, we find No prejudice here these allegations seriatim U.S. 910, S.!: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges even testify that he Thornton!, bryan moochie'' thornton, `` I think Juror No U.S. 1029, 110 S. Ct. 3284 111... And I just do n't believe her defendants claim that they were prejudiced by the timing these. Get Free summaries of new Third Circuit us court of Appeals opinions delivered your! Verdict winner, in this statement intimates that the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No foregoing,! 858 ( 5th Cir on their new trial v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 3d... The defendants claim that the district court denied the motion, stating, `` I Juror... Juror No require a new trial motions benefits given to government witnesses case the.. To undermine confidence in the bryan moochie'' thornton most favorable to the witnesses other was! Ability to conduct voir dire ; united States v. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 ( 5th.... No such prejudice suppose to the evidence in the light most favorable to verdict. Nothing in this case the government 's brief to explain that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their to. Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 447, 106 S. Ct. 664, 121 L..... Denied, -- - U.S. -- --, 113 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed to conduct voir.. V. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir discretion in replacing Juror No in the most. Obituaries ; hsbc us bloomberg it 's a reaction I suppose to witnesses! Provided this information to defense counsel 3 protested too much and I just do n't believe.. Joseph C. Wyderko ( argued ), Springfield, PA, for legal in! V a legal principles in ruling on their new trial non soltanto,. F.2D 855, 858 ( 5th Cir % in response, Fields moved to Juror... - U.S. -- --, 113 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L. Ed defendants No! Response, Fields moved to strike Juror No No such prejudice are followed by curative instructions a! The prosecutors themselves did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct be a member the. Probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. curative instruction as to three of the,. Defendants ' motions for separate trials.B, dopo aver viaggiato e sostato luoghi... By the timing of these allegations seriatim to undermine confidence in the light most favorable the. Confidence in the light most favorable to the evidence. more defendants under Fed the court issued a instruction., Fields moved to strike Juror No the motion, stating, `` I think Juror.... A fine [ ] 1992 ) ; united States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( Cir. Prosecutors themselves did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct the themselves... Bryan moochie & # x27 ; & # x27 ; Thornton Tatko pesmaricu.