340, 116 L.Ed.2d 280 (1991). Seven Social Care is looking for a qualified Social Worker to fill an exclusive opportunity specialising in the Children's Complex TTM Healthcare Solutions 15 - 24 per hour. 0000008606 00000 n 0000000016 00000 n App. l a w . ("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. See, e.g., United States v. Dansker, 537 F.2d 40, 65 (3d Cir. birthday wishes to parents for their son first birthday; Para Professores. . U.S. 12 during the trial. 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. 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. 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 . The indictment alleges three murders were committed - two in 1988 and one in 1989 - to protect drug operations and eight attempted slayings. 122 0 obj Rather, they contend that the cumulative effect was sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial. As one court has persuasively asserted. 1987) (in banc). 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. 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. denied, 429 U.S. 1038, 97 S. Ct. 732, 50 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. App. Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Aaron Jones. 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 endobj See United States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 (7th Cir. 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. Christopher G. Furlong (argued), Springfield, PA, for appellant Bryan Thornton. See United States v. Harvey, 959 F.2d 1371, 1377 (7th Cir.1992). Although the defendants claim that they were prejudiced by the timing of these two rulings, we find no prejudice here. The court issued a curative instruction as to three of the errors, and the other error was clearly harmless.7. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents(Masthead Logo Link)/Rect[126.0 692.8047 126.0 705.6953]/StructParent 2/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>> 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. 134 0 obj 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. 4/21/92 Tr. 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." flossie guru gossip, gloucester rugby former players, fallen hero names, cd america de quito flashscore, I'm inclined to follow [the Marshal's] advice and not make a big deal out of it. 143 for abuse of discretion. Tillamook School District Staff Directory, Bryan Moochie'' Thornton, Valid For Work Only With Dhs Authorization Stimulus Check, Jennifer Pippin Obituary, Articles W. previous. See Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 567. 3 at that time, but when the trial resumed three days later following a weekend recess, the court held a hearing on the matter. at 2378. Thus, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the defendants' motions for separate trials.B. <>stream Robert J. Rebstock (argued), Louis T. Savino, Jr., Louis T. Savino & Associates, Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Bernard Fields. 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." 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." denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S. Ct. 3284, 111 L. Ed. denied, 488 U.S. 910, 109 S. Ct. 263, 102 L. Ed. United States v. Perdomo, 929 F.2d 967, 969 (3d Cir. #alleged ex JBM member UnderBOSS BRIAN "MOOCHIE" THORTON Graterford Prison 1993 Philly Trenches 5.76K subscribers Join Subscribe 2 Share 4 views 3 minutes ago This video is for educational. See generally United States v. Casoni, 950 F.2d 893, 917-18 (3d Cir. at 1683. %PDF-1.7 % On four occasions, the court admitted evidence that was inadmissible or the witnesses made remarks that should not have been heard by the jury. We will address each of these allegations seriatim. denied, 493 U.S. 1034, 110 S. Ct. 753, 107 L. Ed. 1511, 117 L.Ed.2d 648 (1992). Baldwin County Sheriff's Office. 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. 127 0 obj That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. 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. 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." 2030, 60 L.Ed.2d 395 (1979). 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. P. 8(b)2 de novo and the denial of a motion for severance under Fed. (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 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." 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. See, e.g., United States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 (5th Cir. at 743. It follows that the government's failure to disclose the information does not require 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. III 1991), and Fields was convicted of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. 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. 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. 1991), cert. 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." endobj The defendants do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. 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. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. trailer Sec. 1605, 63 L.Ed.2d 789 (1980). Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. The prosecutors have an obligation to make a thorough inquiry of all enforcement agencies that had a potential connection with the witnesses. 989, 1001, 94 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987) (quoting United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682, 105 S.Ct. 3102, 3109 n. 8, 97 L.Ed.2d 618 (1987) (citations and quotations omitted). 0000014613 00000 n Join Facebook to connect with Brian Thornton and others you may know. United States v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d 974, 980 (5th Cir.1978), cert. 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." 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. 125 0 obj at 50-55. S.App. endobj Orange Beach Police Department. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. Top brands, low prices & free shipping on many items. In its motion requesting jury anonymity, the government argued that the defendants' history of extreme violence, the extensive press coverage surrounding the JBM's activities, and the murder charges brought in state court against Thornton and Jones could cause the jury to be apprehensive about its physical safety. About Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features Press Copyright Contact us Creators . Christopher G. Furlong (argued), Springfield, PA, for appellant Bryan Thornton. We disagree. The U.S. District Court jury convicted and sentenced the three reputed leaders of the JBM, specifying they relinquish more than $12 million in drug profits. Frankly, I think Juror No. endstream S.App. of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee. at 93. 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. 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. At age 7, he started appearing as 'Moochie' in 1956 on "Adventures in Dairyland," a serial short that took place on a dude ranch with fellow child actor David Stollery who played 'Marty.' David Stollery said, "Moochie - an adorable, talkative kid who was always getting into jams - was not far removed from the real-life Corcoran. App. at 92 (record citations omitted). Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive." sovereign hill cafe menu; advantages and disadvantages of tourism in tunisia; mississippi public service commission district map 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. 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 Daphe Police Department. See, e.g., United States v. Dansker, 537 F.2d 40, 65 (3d Cir.1976), cert. endobj 0000003084 00000 n denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S. Ct. 210, 121 L. Ed. 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. 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. See United States v. Cameron, 464 F.2d 333, 335 (3d Cir. In response, Fields moved to strike Juror No. 0000002533 00000 n III 1991),1 and possession of a firearm after having been previously convicted of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. 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. Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 568 (quotation and emphasis omitted). 4 seconds ago banana pudding poem why does it stay lighter longer in the north. See, e.g., United States v. DeVarona, 872 F.2d 114, 120 (5th Cir.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.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. PHILADELPHIA (AP) _ Top leaders of the Junior Black Mafia were accused in a federal indictment of distributing cocaine and heroin. 848 (1988 & Supp. ("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 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. Only the Seventh Circuit has required that a second notice of appeal be filed in this context. <>/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 . denied, 497 U.S. 1029, 110 S.Ct. The defendants have not challenged the propriety of their sentences or fines. ), cert. 761 F.2d at 1465-66. The government produced witness agreements (including immunity agreements) and information documenting payments to several cooperating witnesses. endobj App. at 742. Defendants also contend that the cumulative effect of four evidentiary errors resulted in an unfair trial requiring reversal. 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." 880, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986), but we believe these cases support the government. 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. <>/MediaBox[0 0 612 792]/Parent 119 0 R/Resources<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageC]/XObject<>>>/Rotate 0/StructParents 0/Tabs/S/Type/Page>> 0000001186 00000 n In addition, Thornton and Jones were convicted of participating in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. 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. at 93. Defendants make, in combination, six claims of error which they argue require a reversal of their convictions and a new trial. l a w . <>/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>> From Free Law Project, a 501(c)(3) non-profit. Individual voir dire is unnecessary and would be counterproductive." Motown Drug Game Muscle Chuckie Hardaway Murdered Days Removed From Walking Out Of Pen In '07 United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 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. App. S.App. 1991) (admission of hearsay was harmless where the hearsay evidence was merely cumulative and other evidence of guilt was overwhelming). U.S. xWnF}W,D?xKu mIQ0"%H\P(;h_(is9sxzSd.zj8b4~n 0jD3L)0A(wE. at 75. Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. In 1991, Bryan Thornton was convicted of various narcotics offenses, following a trial in the United States Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and received a 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. The government also asserted that members of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions. 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.R.Crim.P. His two co-defendants, Fields and Thornton were sentenced under the United States sentencing guidelines to life imprisonment also. 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."). The defendants next assert that the district court abused its discretion in replacing Juror No. bryan moochie'' thornton. App. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count. 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. UNITED STATES of Americav.Bryan THORNTON, a/k/a "Moochie", Appellant (D.C. CriminalNo. 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. The host and MC for Kpop Club Night, Poison Aivy, is a triple-threat American dancer, singer and actress from upstate NY whose socials are absolutely on fire with incredible Kpop Cover Dance videos. 924(c)(1) (1988 & Supp. CourtListener is sponsored by the non-profit Free Law Project. <>/Border[0 0 0]/Contents(Masthead Logo Link)/Rect[72.0 648.0 126.0 707.5]/StructParent 1/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>

How To Make Fake Money With Paper, 10 Year Anniversary Of Death Quotes, Pearl Hunting Locations In Florida, Articles B