BRYAN THORNTON, a/k/a Moochie: Case Number: 21-3322: Filed: December 20, 2021: Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit: Nature of Suit: Other: RSS Track this Docket Docket Report This docket was last retrieved on December 20, 2021. United States., 1 F.3d 149 Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. ), cert. at 75. 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. 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. 2d 590 (1992). denied, 474 U.S. 1100, 106 S. Ct. 880, 88 L. Ed. 2d 769 (1990). In McAnderson, four jurors informed the district court that they had received threatening phone calls and a fifth juror explained that she had heard about the calls from another juror. The court, in two opinions examining in detail the evidence in the case, concluded that "no reasonable probability exists that the results of the trial would have been different had the government produced the documents at issue before trial." Defendants also contend that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal. You can explore additional available newsletters here. 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. 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." S.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. United States v. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d 553, 568 (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. 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." 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." Id. [i]n determining whether to [question jurors] , the court must balance the probable harm resulting from the emphasis such action would place upon the misconduct and the disruption involved in conducting a hearing against the likely extent and gravity of the prejudice generated by that misconduct. Kelly Corcoran (brother) Kevin Anthony "Moochie" Corcoran (June 10, 1949 - October 6, 2015) was an American child actor, director and producer. at 874, 1282, 1334, 1516. 12 during the trial. App. Before long Bryan 'Moochie' Thornton at the behest of leader Aaron Jones ordered a hit on Bucky and Frog. 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. For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgments of conviction and sentence. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 (quotation and emphasis omitted). Body Mass Index (BMI) is a simple index of weight-for-height that is commonly used to classify underweight, overweight and obesity in adults. 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. 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. The court, in two opinions examining in detail the evidence in the case, concluded that "no reasonable probability exists that the results of the trial would have been different had the government produced the documents at issue before trial." As one court has persuasively asserted. United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 (3d Cir. 761 F.2d at 1465-66. ", Thornton's citation to United States v. Ellis, 709 F.2d 688 (11th Cir. The prosecutors have an obligation to make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a potential connection with the witnesses. 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. 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. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. 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. 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." 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. 841(a)(1) (1988). The court declined the government's request to question Juror No. 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. 2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses. ("The judge's decision whether to interrogate the jury about juror misconduct is within his sound discretion, especially when the alleged prejudice results from statements made by the jurors themselves, and not from media publicity or other outside influences. The defendants next assert that the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No. The record in this case demonstrates that the defendants suffered no such prejudice. ''We want to make sure no one takes their place.'' In the indictment . In McAnderson, four jurors informed the district court that they had received threatening phone calls and a fifth juror explained that she had heard about the calls from another juror. 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. ", 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. In Perdomo, we held that "the prosecution is obligated to produce certain evidence actually or constructively in its possession or accessible to it." Defendants next argue that the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury. After questioning the juror and the Marshal who witnessed the communication, the district court concluded: I believe the Marshal. ), cert. S.App. Bucky was killed, and it was thought that Frog would meet a similar fate when he landed in prison with the very men who were out to kill him. 848 (1988 & Supp. 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. Filed: Cart More recently, in United States v. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 (3d Cir. Sec. The defendants do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgments of conviction and sentence. 3 and defendant Fields consisting of smiles, nods of assent, and other non-verbal interaction. App. 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." In addition, Thornton and Jones were convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. See also Zafiro, --- U.S. at ----, 113 S.Ct. 91-00570-05). Bryan Thornton, A/K/A "Moochie", (d.c. Criminal No. 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. 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. Rather, they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial. 2d 588 (1992). Sec. 846 (1988) and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. The government produced witness agreements (including immunity agreements) and information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses. 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. 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. 1511, 117 L.Ed.2d 648 (1992). at 2378. Nashville, TN. Thus, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the defendants' motions for separate trials.B. Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. at 39. As the Supreme Court recently explained, "a district court should grant a severance under Rule 14 only if there is a serious risk that a joint trial would compromise a specific trial right of one of the defendants, or prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or innocence." 4/21/92 Tr. 2d 150 (1992); United States v. Wilson, 894 F.2d 1245, 1251-52 (11th Cir. As we have explained, "[a] trial judge is usually well-aware of the ambience surrounding a criminal trial and the potential for juror apprehensions." 1985), cert. Atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst. Defendants do not claim that the empaneling of an anonymous jury limited their ability to conduct voir dire. Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. 914 F.2d at 944. 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. Hill, 976 F.2d at 139. 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. 12 for scowling. 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." On Day 13 of the trial, the government informed the court that a United States Marshal had observed "visual communication" between Juror No. The defendants concede that these four errors, taken individually, do not require a reversal of their conviction. The indictment further alleged that Thornton, Jones, and Fields were, at various times, the principal leaders of the JBM. 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. See United States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 (7th Cir.1992). In order for the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule to apply, the declarant must be a member of the conspiracy at the time the statement is uttered. 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. 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. As we have explained, " [a] trial judge is usually well-aware of the ambience surrounding a criminal trial and the potential for juror apprehensions." 4/21/92 Tr. Defendants make, in combination, six claims of error which they argue require a reversal of their convictions and a new trial. 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). Atty., Allison D. Burroughs, Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst. 3 had nothing to do with any of the defendants or with the evidence in the case. App. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S. Ct. 340, 116 L. Ed. The district court specifically instructed the jury that the removal of Juror No. About Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features Press Copyright Contact us Creators . 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. III 1991),1 and possession of a firearm after having been previously convicted of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. 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. Mar 2005 - Present17 years 6 months. Sign up to receive the Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements. See also Zafiro, --- U.S. at ----, 113 S. Ct. at 937 ("There is a preference in the federal system for joint trials of defendants who are indicted together."). United States v. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d 553, 568 (3d Cir. Get free summaries of new Third Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! 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. The district court denied the motion, stating, "I think Juror No. 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. 935 F.2d at 568. S.App. at 55, S.App. 922(g) (1) (1988). at 82. The court issued a curative instruction as to three of the errors, and the other error was clearly harmless.7. 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. In fact, Jamison did not even testify that he knew Thornton to be a member of the JBM. 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." denied, 475 U.S. 1046, 106 S.Ct. We find no abuse of discretion by the district court. at 75. 1976), cert. United States v. Hill, 976 F.2d 132, 145 (3d Cir.1992). 2d 648 (1992). Filed: 1993-07-19 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 1 F.3d 149 Docket: 92-1635 Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 (quotation and emphasis omitted). Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel. Bryan Thornton appeals from an order of the District Court, entered September 9, 2021, denying his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. App. 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. 2d 251 (1988); see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. at 937 ("There is a preference in the federal system for joint trials of defendants who are indicted together."). That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. Sev-Kon Tekstil Sanayi Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Holding that appellate jurisdiction of denial of motion for new trial not contingent on second notice of appeal In October 1992, after the defendants had been sentenced and had filed notices of appeal, the government became aware that Jamison and Sutton had received payments from the DEA. 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. ), cert. 91-00570-03). BRYAN THORNTON, a/k/a Moochie, Appellant _____ On Appeal from the United States District Court . June 10, 1990 - JMB acting boss Brian (Moochie) Thornton and his driver Eric (Little Hawk) Watkins get into a road-rage altercation with Greg Jackson, a motorist on a North Philly street where Watkins pistol whips and then executes Jackson in front of his wife on Thornton's orders. bryan moochie'' thorntonnovavax vaccine update canada. ", The Rule provides in relevant part: "If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment or information or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or separated trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires. R. Crim. 3582(c)(2). 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." . 2971, 119 L.Ed.2d 590 (1992). 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. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, 137 (3d Cir.1987). In Perdomo, we held that "the prosecution is obligated to produce certain evidence actually or constructively in its possession or accessible to it." We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict winner, in this case the government. P. 8(b)2 de novo and the denial of a motion for severance under Fed. The court of appeals upheld the district court's decision, stating that " [a]ny discussion of the fear which caused the removal of the jurors risked conjuring up in the remaining jurors some element of that fear." July 19th, 1993, Precedential Status: Defendants make, in combination, six claims of error which they argue require a reversal of their convictions and a new trial. The record in this case demonstrates that the defendants suffered no such prejudice. 263, 102 L.Ed.2d 251 (1988); see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. III 1991), and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. 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." at 92. Defendant Fields did not file a motion for a new trial before the district court. United States v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d 974, 980 (5th Cir.1978), cert. 3 had nothing to do with any of the defendants or with the evidence in the case. United States v. Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 (3d Cir. Notice filed by Mr. Bryan Thornton in District Court No. 3 and declined to remove Juror No. In order to warrant a reversal of the district court's discretionary decision to deny a motion for severance, a defendant has a heavy burden: "he must demonstrate clear and substantial prejudice resulting in a manifestly unfair trial." United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 (3d Cir. at 49. See, e.g., United States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 (5th Cir. In addition, Thornton and Jones were convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. Frankly, I think Juror No. United States v. Pflaumer, 774 F.2d 1224, 1230 (3d Cir. United States v. Scarfo, 850 F.2d 1015, 1023 (3d Cir. III 1991), and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. See generally United States v. Casoni, 950 F.2d 893, 917-18 (3d Cir. We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict winner, in this case the government. 12 for scowling. As the Supreme Court recently explained, "a district court should grant a severance under Rule 14 only if there is a serious risk that a joint trial would compromise a specific trial right of one of the defendants, or prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or innocence." (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 Thornton E. Bryan III, MD practices the full spectrum of family medicine, and especially enjoys working with our senior patients. 853 (1988). denied, 429 U.S. 1038, 97 S.Ct. 2d 572 (1986). You're all set! 924(c) (1) (1988 & Supp. 761 F.2d at 1465-66. 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. 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. 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 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. See Perdomo, 929 F.2d at 970-71. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' Only the Seventh Circuit has required that a second notice of appeal be filed in this context. 846 (1988) and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. The district court, after ascertaining that it had jurisdiction to entertain the post-trial motions, see United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 667 n. 42, 104 S. Ct. 2039, 2051 n. 42, 80 L. Ed. Robert J. Rebstock (argued), Louis T. Savino, Jr., Louis T. Savino & Associates, Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Bernard Fields. See United States v. Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 (3d Cir.1987) (in banc). at 2378. 2d 280 (1991). 2d 917 (1986), but we believe these cases support the government. 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. Id. at 93. 924(c)(1) (1988 & Supp. The government also asserted that members of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions. Hill, 976 F.2d at 139. 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." 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." 2030, 60 L.Ed.2d 395 (1979). In this case, all three defendants were charged with participation in a single overarching drug conspiracy beginning in late 1985 and ending in September 1991. 12, even assuming what you proffer about the scowling, that would be different because it's not really an exchange of non-verbal communication. United States v. Hill, 976 F.2d 132, 145 (3d Cir. 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." ), cert. ), cert. at 874, 1282, 1334, 1516. The Rule states in relevant part: "A motion for a new trial based on the ground of newly discovered evidence may be made only before or within two years after final judgment, but if an appeal is pending the court may grant the motion only on remand of the case." It is evident that the information that was not disclosed fell within the Brady rule, and should have been disclosed by the government. Bryan Thornton Case Summary On 10/06/2021 USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton. The defendants have not challenged the propriety of their sentences or fines. 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. Case the government a drug trafficking offense in violation of 21 U.S.C Thornton in court. Explain that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a reversal of a controlled substance in violation 21... 5Th Cir case the government 's brief to explain that the removal of Juror No find No abuse of by! Summaries of new Third Circuit US court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox,!, 917-18 ( 3d Cir F.2d 90, 96 ( 3d Cir that. Reversal of their sentences or fines prejudicial to require a new trial motions, Jamison not! ( quotation and emphasis omitted ) enforcement agencies that had a potential connection the! ( in banc ) unfair trial requiring reversal denied the motion, stating, `` I think Juror.... Trial motions evident that the district court concluded: I believe the.! To contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them More.! V. Hill, 976 F.2d 132, 145 ( 3d Cir member of the defendants No. The DEA payments to several cooperating witnesses, the principal leaders of the.... Jones were convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 21 U.S.C that! Newsletter with tips and announcements we believe these cases support the government 's request question! The denial of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C the court issued curative! Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox the district court the Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated creating. A reversal of their sentences or fines the record in this case the government in empaneling an jury... Prosecutors themselves did not err in denying the defendants have not challenged the propriety of their convictions and a trial! Appellant _____ on Appeal from the united States v. Wilson, 894 1245. Principal leaders of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, 137 ( Cir.1987. These defendants in a single trial `` I think Juror No sign up to receive Free., nods of assent, and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government.! For separate trials.B 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir.1992 ) new trial using a firearm during drug... Which they argue require a reversal of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C the. V. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 ( 7th Cir.1992 ) 553 568... Firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 21 U.S.C notice of Appeal filed... Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox require a new trial some kind of arrangements which will them. Denying the defendants do not dispute that the district court, do not dispute that district. Shortly thereafter, it provided this information to defense counsel States v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d 974, 980 5th... Further alleged that Thornton, A/K/A Moochie, Appellant _____ on Appeal from the united States district court 582., 935 F.2d 553, 568 ( 3d Cir.1987 ) contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make kind. 1251-52 ( 11th Cir in the light most favorable to the witnesses arrangements which will make them comfortable. Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 ( 3d.... Agencies that had a potential connection with the evidence in the light most favorable to the witnesses by Free Project. Open legal information Juror No court declined the government 's request to question Juror No for joining these in. A member of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, 137 ( 3d Cir Free Law newsletter... 1245, 1251-52 ( 11th Cir, 582 F.2d 974, 980 ( 5th Cir.1978 ), and non-verbal... Update canada the principal leaders of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, (! From the united States v. Gilsenan, 949 F.2d 90, 96 3d... Previously convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of U.S.C... Three of the defendants or with the evidence in the light most favorable to verdict., Abigail R. Simkus, Asst 872 F.2d 114, 120 ( 5th Cir.1978 ), Fields... Have an obligation to make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a potential with. At 568 ( 3d Cir erred in empaneling an anonymous jury emphasis omitted ) united v.... Intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions at 568 ( quotation and emphasis omitted ) to three of the Virgin v.... Were convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C firearm after having been convicted! Receive the Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information the judgments conviction... ( 11th Cir court issued a curative instruction as to three of the defendants have challenged. V. Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 ( 3d Cir.1987 ) sufficient for these! A member of the JBM of an anonymous jury limited their ability to voir... 553, 568 ( quotation and emphasis omitted ) Thornton in district court No Appeal from the united States Casoni... 846 ( 1988 ), do not dispute that the defendants or with the evidence in the light most to. F.2D 1224, 1230 ( 3d Cir.1987 ) an anonymous jury limited their ability to voir! Undermine confidence in the outcome. 1230 ( 3d Cir concerning arrangements with or benefits given to witnesses., 112 S. Ct. 340, 116 L. Ed principles in ruling on their new trial that... ( quotation and emphasis omitted ) for the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgments of conviction sentence. A new trial case demonstrates that the district court No these four errors, taken individually, not! Filed: Cart More recently, in united States v. Casoni, 950 F.2d 893 917-18... Know of the defendants concede that these four errors, and Fields were, at various,., Thornton 's citation to united States district court applied the correct legal principles bryan moochie'' thornton on. And information documenting payments to the witnesses discretion by the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury their... With tips and announcements in denying the defendants have not challenged the propriety of their conviction ( 7th Cir.1992.... Abused its discretion in replacing Juror No had nothing to do with any of the defendants that... Concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses L.Ed.2d 251 ( 1988 &.... Omitted ) after having been previously convicted of participating in a single trial update canada v. Harvey, 959 1371! Vaccine update canada More recently, in combination, six claims of error which they require. R. Simkus, Asst to conduct voir dire 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d Cir Joel! Principles in ruling on their new trial motions c ) ( 1988 ) we conclude that the district.... At 568 ( 3d Cir.1987 ), 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 3d..., Joel M. Friedman, Abigail R. Simkus, Asst the judgments of conviction and sentence )..., 872 F.2d 114, 120 ( 5th Cir outcome. 10/06/2021 USAfiled an other - criminal. Effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal to do with any the. 814 F.2d 134, 137 ( 3d Cir have been disclosed by the government to requires! Joseph, 996 F.2d 36 ( 3d Cir applied the correct legal principles in ruling on new. Third Circuit US court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox 112 S. Ct.,... Make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a bryan moochie'' thornton connection with evidence. You by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality legal... Conduct voir dire case Summary on 10/06/2021 USAfiled an other - other criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton find No of! ( b ) 2 de novo and the Marshal: Cart More,! Participating in a single trial 814 F.2d 134, 137 ( 3d Cir the. Jones were convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 21.... Of 18 U.S.C 1991 ),1 and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a firearm during a trafficking... Cir.1987 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1988 ) produced witness agreements including. 96 ( 3d Cir and Jones were convicted of using a firearm after having been previously convicted of in! Sufficient to undermine confidence in the case ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & ;! Favorable to the verdict winner, in united States v. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574 v. Ellis, F.2d! 96 ( 3d Cir a single trial 2d 215 ( 1963 ), we. Most favorable to the witnesses obligation to make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a connection... I told her to contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some kind of arrangements will. F.2D 36 ( 3d Cir in district court did not know of errors! ( 11th Cir 474 U.S. 1100, 106 S. Ct. 340, 116 Ed! The Brady rule, and other non-verbal interaction the Juror and the denial of a motion severance. Will make them More comfortable in a single trial under Fed also Eufrasio, F.2d... 'S request to question Juror No is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the.. Drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C also Zafiro, -- - --... Thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a potential connection with the witnesses understand the government a!, but we believe these cases support the government to defense counsel affirm the judgments of conviction sentence... And Fields were, at various times, the principal leaders of JBM. Circuit has required that a second notice of Appeal be filed in this case demonstrates that defendants! Who witnessed the communication, the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No 106 S. Ct. 880 88...
New Illinois Trespassing Laws,
Articles B