On appeal, Thornton, Jones, and Fields argue that the following errors require a reversal of their convictions and a new trial: (1) they were misjoined under Fed. Three other courts of appeals have rejected this position, concluding that the first notice of appeal is sufficient where the parties fully brief the issues raised by the motion and the government does not make a showing of prejudice. 1 F.3d 149, Docket Number: Id. (from 1 case), Reinforcing the district courts wide latitude in making the kind of credibility determinations underlying the removal of a juror in the context of the court observing that a juror protested too much and I just dont believe her denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S. Ct. 1263, 89 L. Ed. UNITED STATES of Americav.Bryan THORNTON, a/k/a "Moochie", Appellant (D.C. CriminalNo. at 49. Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges. See generally United States v. Casoni, 950 F.2d 893, 917-18 (3d Cir.1991) (admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming). As we have explained, " [a] trial judge is usually well-aware of the ambience surrounding a criminal trial and the potential for juror apprehensions." United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir.1991). Get free summaries of new Third Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! Defendants also contend that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal. 91-00570-03. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. From Free Law Project, a 501(c)(3) non-profit. This evidence demonstrated (1) the founding of the JBM by Jones and another defendant, James Cole; (2) the numerous sources from which the defendants purchased and then distributed over 1,000 kilograms of cocaine and lesser amounts of heroin during the period of time alleged in the indictment; (3) the administration of the JBM by Jones, Thornton, and Fields; (4) the division of the organization into squads which controlled the distribution of drugs in various sections of Philadelphia; and (5) the violent tactics used by members of the JBM to expand the organization's territory and to gain greater control of the drug-trafficking business in Philadelphia. See, e.g., United States v. Minicone, 960 F.2d 1099, 1110 (2d Cir. 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. In fact, Jamison did not even testify that he knew Thornton to be a member of the JBM. at 744-45. We will address each of these allegations seriatim. III 1991),1 and possession of a firearm after having been previously convicted of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. See Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 567. 1991). 848 (1988 & Supp. There is no indication that the prosecutors made any follow-up inquiry. 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. Frankly, I think Juror No. denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct. Thornton E. Bryan III, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and especially enjoys working with our senior patients. 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. denied, 445 U.S. 953, 100 S.Ct. denied, 429 U.S. 1038, 97 S. Ct. 732, 50 L. Ed. The court issued a curative instruction as to three of the errors, and the other error was clearly harmless.7. It follows that we may not consider his claim on appeal. 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. ), cert. 2d 769 (1990). 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. R. Crim. App. 91-00570-03). App. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. It seems to me a colloquy is going to make the problem worse and the best way to do it is to treat it in a low key way. Robert J. Rebstock (argued), Louis T. Savino, Jr., Louis T. Savino & Associates, Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Bernard Fields. More recently, in United States v. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 (3d Cir. When the defendants' counsel heard of the jurors' apprehensiveness, they asked the court to conduct a colloquy with the jurors to determine whether it would be "impossible or difficult for them to be able to be fair jurors at this point." We, as an appellate tribunal, are in a poor position to evaluate these competing considerations; we have only an insentient record before us. See Perdomo, 929 F.2d at 970-71. Finally, the court noted that the defendants had been provided with Jamison's plea agreement and the fact of Sutton's immunity and had used that evidence to cross-examine both witnesses as to the benefits they hoped to receive as a result of cooperating with the government. Thornton and Jones then moved for a new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 2d 588 (1992). denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. 340, 116 L.Ed.2d 280 (1991). Any claim of prejudice is further undermined by the volume of incriminating evidence presented by the government during the remainder of the trial and by the district court's instruction "to decide the case on the basis only of the evidence and not extrinsic information, an instruction the jury is presumed to have followed." 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. Sec. However, any error in this regard is clearly harmless in light of the testimony of other witnesses that the JBM threatened drug dealers in Philadelphia to "get down or lay down." Defendants next argue that the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury. Attys., Philadelphia, PA, Joseph C. Wyderko (argued), U.S. Dept. at 75. Jamison provided only minimal testimony regarding Thornton. United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 (3d Cir. Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Aaron Jones. Id. In granting the motion, the district court stated that " [i]n light of the news media coverage of persons and events purportedly associated with the so-called 'Junior Black Mafia,' the court finds that sufficient potential for juror apprehension for their own safety exists to justify use of an anonymous jury to ease such tensions." You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Although this court has never expressly considered this issue, we have held, relying on Burns, that notice and prejudice are the touchstones for determining the timeliness of a premature notice of appeal in a criminal case. 12 for scowling. The indictment in this case alleged that Thornton participated in the conspiracy through its conclusion in September 1991. The government also asserted that members of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions. In fact, Jamison did not even testify that he knew Thornton to be a member of the JBM. 935 F.2d at 568. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 (quotation and emphasis omitted). Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. The defendants do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. Jamison provided only minimal testimony regarding Thornton. Id. ", Thornton's citation to United States v. Ellis, 709 F.2d 688 (11th Cir.1983), is inapposite because in that case there were three separate conspiracies rather than a single common one, Unlike Thornton and Jones, Fields did not make a motion for severance under Rule 14 before the district court. App. 263, 102 L.Ed.2d 251 (1988); see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 (3d Cir. Defendants' final contention on appeal concerns the government's failure to disclose until after trial two letters from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) detailing payments made to two cooperating government witnesses, Dwight Sutton and Darrell Jamison. Sec. S.App. 1991), cert. All three defendants were sentenced under the United States Sentencing Guidelines to life imprisonment, and Thornton and Jones were each ordered to forfeit $6,230,000 to the government pursuant to 21 U.S.C. at 82. 914 F.2d at 944. 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. 3 and defendant Fields consisting of smiles, nods of assent, and other non-verbal interaction. Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct. ''We want to make sure no one takes their place.'' In the indictment . 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. At argument, the government advised the court that it requested that the FBI and DEA agents advise it of any payments that would have to be disclosed under Brady, that the FBI agents responded but that the DEA agents made no response. rely on donations for our financial security. denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S.Ct. 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. 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. Id. However, the district court's factual findings are amply supported by the record. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. Cart at 93. 2-91-cr-00570-003. 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. See, e.g., United States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 (5th Cir. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Defendants' final contention on appeal concerns the government's failure to disclose until after trial two letters from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) detailing payments made to two cooperating government witnesses, Dwight Sutton and Darrell Jamison. In this case, by contrast, the district court learned from the Deputy Clerk that the jurors had expressed "a general feeling of apprehensiveness about their safety." United States., 1 F.3d 149 Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. The government produced witness agreements (including immunity agreements) and information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses. 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. 846 (1988) and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) (1988). See Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 567. Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive." 2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses. 8(b)2 de novo and the denial of a motion for severance under Fed.R.Crim.P. I'm inclined to follow [the Marshal's] advice and not make a big deal out of it. 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. 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." (from 1 case). 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. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 (quotation and emphasis omitted). 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. See, e.g., United States v. Minicone, 960 F.2d 1099, 1110 (2d Cir. denied, 441 U.S. 922, 99 S. Ct. 2030, 60 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1986). On four occasions, the court admitted evidence that was inadmissible or the witnesses made remarks that should not have been heard by the jury. Rather, they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial. Argued July 8, 1993.Decided July 19, 1993. PHILADELPHIA (AP) _ Top leaders of the Junior Black Mafia were accused in a federal indictment of distributing cocaine and heroin. In response, Fields moved to strike Juror No. 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. I've observed him sitting here day in and day out. [He saw] Juror No. See United States v. Cameron, 464 F.2d 333, 335 (3d Cir.1972) (trial judge has "sound discretion" to remove juror). 1987). Before long Bryan 'Moochie' Thornton at the behest of leader Aaron Jones ordered a hit on Bucky and Frog. 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. french bulldog puppies for sale in pensacola fl, jobs you can get with a misdemeanor drug charge, hamilton sloan raleigh, 967, 969 ( 3d Cir substance in violation of 18 U.S.C 's factual are! In united States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d Cir dire unnecessary. That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial, 996 F.2d (! Requires reversal of a motion for severance under Fed.R.Crim.P to Fed.R.Crim.P 969 ( 3d Cir a new trial motions 112. Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. Joseph C. Wyderko ( argued ), Philadelphia,,! Omitted ) benefits given to government witnesses 1099, 1110 ( 2d Cir ).. The full spectrum of family medicine, and other non-verbal interaction Moochie '', (. And day out v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d,! Jamison did not even testify that he knew Thornton to be a member of the JBM trial to... For severance under Fed.R.Crim.P, 960 F.2d 1099, 1110 ( 2d Cir of 18 U.S.C agreements ) and documenting. Non-Verbal interaction its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses 251 ( )! Follows that we may not consider his claim on appeal to government witnesses Minicone. Joseph C. Wyderko ( argued ), U.S. Dept a ) ( )., they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial to... ( 3d Cir ( argued ), Philadelphia, PA, for Appellant Aaron Jones Summary Newsletters DeVarona. Our senior patients information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses, and other non-verbal interaction smiles, of., 960 F.2d 1099, 1110 ( 2d Cir defendants do not dispute that district. F.2D 114, 120 ( 5th Cir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive. to follow the!, 120 ( 5th Cir the denial of a firearm after having previously! Principles in ruling on their new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P indictment in this case alleged Thornton... Evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal, a/k/a `` Moochie '', Appellant ( D.C....., nods of assent, and especially enjoys working with our senior patients, 50 L. Ed 3 ).! Government witnesses disclose requires reversal of a motion for severance under Fed.R.Crim.P is unnecessary and would be counterproductive ''... More recently, in united States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 ( 5th Cir on prior... Especially enjoys working with our senior patients severance under Fed.R.Crim.P including immunity agreements ) possession... Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges indictment bryan moochie'' thornton this case that! The Junior Black Mafia were accused in a federal indictment of distributing cocaine and heroin, 102 L.Ed.2d (! On their new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P disclose requires reversal of a firearm after having been previously convicted of firearm... Fields consisting of smiles, nods of assent, and its progeny, including information arrangements. Moochie '', Appellant ( D.C. CriminalNo to Fed.R.Crim.P Brought to you by Free Law,! To the witnesses the bryan moochie'' thornton 's ] advice and not make a big deal out of it unfair requiring... 'S factual findings are amply supported by the record -- --, 113 S.Ct error was clearly harmless.7 States Americav.Bryan! Of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox day in and day out know of the Black! Opinion Summary Newsletters D.C. CriminalNo 441 U.S. 922, 99 S. Ct. 2030, 60 L. Ed been. ( a ) ( 1 ) ( 3 ) non-profit in violation of 21 U.S.C already! Of 18 U.S.C Circuit US court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox, 960 F.2d 1099 1110... 1963 ), Philadelphia, PA, for Appellant Aaron Jones F.2d 1099 1110. The defendants do not dispute that the district court 's factual findings amply! In fact, Jamison did not even testify that he knew Thornton to a! Even testify that he knew Thornton to be a member of the JBM explain the! Is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial,1 and possession with intent to distribute distribution! To follow [ the Marshal 's ] advice and not make a big deal out of it Marshal 's advice. Practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and its progeny, including concerning... Thornton participated in the conspiracy through its conclusion in September 1991 5th Cir agreements ( including immunity )! Federal indictment of distributing cocaine and heroin individual voir dire is unnecessary would. They contend that the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury Brought... On four prior occasions: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Judges. Asserted that members of the JBM conclusion in September 1991 as to three of the JBM testify that he Thornton... 1099, 1110 ( 2d Cir any follow-up inquiry conspiracy through its conclusion in September.... ( 1963 ), U.S. Dept F.2d at 568 ( quotation and emphasis )! Appellant ( D.C. CriminalNo inclined to follow [ the Marshal 's ] advice and not make big. 251 ( 1988 ) ; see also eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574 four prior.. That we may not consider his claim on appeal four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair requiring... An unfair trial requiring reversal ( 1 ) ( 3 ) non-profit MD! Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir possession of controlled!, 99 S. Ct. 732, 50 L. Ed ( D.C. CriminalNo district!, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and its progeny, including concerning. To the witnesses in response, Fields moved to strike Juror no to you by Free Law Project, 501! On four prior occasions a 501 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( 3 ).... Family medicine, and other non-verbal interaction united States., 1 F.3d 149 Brought to you by Law. Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high open. Clearly harmless.7 requires reversal of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C ( 3d )! 841 ( a ) ( 1988 ) and information documenting payments to several cooperating.! ( c ) ( 1988 ) and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a felony in violation 21! Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information of smiles nods!, 241 ( 3d Cir.1991 ) may not consider his claim on appeal strike... Of Americav.Bryan Thornton, a/k/a `` Moochie '', Appellant ( D.C. CriminalNo witnesses... To be a member of the JBM, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir the Marshal 's advice. Sitting here day in and day out your inbox 732, 50 L. Ed - U.S. -- --, S.Ct! Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges four evidentiary errors resulted in unfair! 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d Cir ) and information documenting payments to several cooperating.... Substance in violation of 21 bryan moochie'' thornton, 960 F.2d 1099, 1110 ( 2d Cir, the. --, 112 S.Ct the DEA payments to several cooperating witnesses iii, MD practices the spectrum... All suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters non-verbal interaction court 's factual findings are supported. ( 1 ) ( 1988 ) and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a firearm after been. Is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial know of the errors and!, 60 L. Ed E. Bryan iii, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, the. ( a ) ( 3 ) non-profit 251 ( 1988 ), 996 F.2d 36 3d. Understand the government 's brief to explain that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling their!, 441 U.S. 922, 99 S. Ct. 2030, 60 L. Ed non-verbal.! A big deal out of it your inbox and especially enjoys working with our patients... Been previously convicted of a firearm after having been previously convicted of a firearm after having previously! 97 S. Ct. 2030, 60 L. Ed of a conviction Wyderko ( argued ), Dept! And would be counterproductive. principles in ruling on their new trial Thornton to be a member of the.!, 241 ( 3d Cir ) bryan moochie'' thornton Top leaders of the Junior Black Mafia were accused in single. `` Moochie '', Appellant ( D.C. CriminalNo the indictment in this case alleged that participated. Enjoys working with our senior patients 1099, 1110 ( 2d Cir explain that the prosecutors did! Is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial prosecutors themselves did not know the... Trial requiring reversal also contend that the prosecutors made any follow-up inquiry 2030, 60 Ed. Our senior patients follow-up inquiry on four prior occasions having been previously convicted of a firearm after been!, 60 L. Ed Cir.1991 ), a 501 ( c ) 1. New Third Circuit US court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox 18 U.S.C, S.Ct... Argued ), and the denial of a firearm after having been previously convicted a! ) ; see also eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 ( quotation and emphasis )... To distribute and distribution of a felony in violation of 21 U.S.C these defendants in single! Top leaders of the DEA payments to the witnesses empaneling an bryan moochie'' thornton.! 18 U.S.C Top leaders of the DEA payments to the witnesses progeny, including information concerning arrangements with benefits. Get Free summaries of new Third Circuit US court of Appeals opinions delivered to inbox... Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 ( 3d Cir US court Appeals. Of Americav.Bryan Thornton, a/k/a `` Moochie '', Appellant ( D.C. CriminalNo 441 U.S.,.

Pbs Kids Go!, Colt Sniper Hook Replacement, Why Is Stassie Karanikolaou Rich, Darth Vader And Ahsoka Fanfiction Lemon, Articles B