Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

In this case, the defendant was charged with abusive sexual contact of a minor in Indian Country, based on conduct that occurred between 1998 and 2000, when the victim was approximately 15 or 16 years old. The victim reported the abuse to the FBI in 2021, stating that she had previously disclosed it to a therapist at a rape crisis center, but no action was taken at that time. The alleged abuse took place within the Navajo Nation, and the defendant did not contest his status as an enrolled member of the Navajo Nation or the location of the offense.The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the superseding indictment, which argued that the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations. The district court found that the extended statute of limitations for sexual offenses against children under 18, as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3283, applied to the case. The defendant then entered a conditional guilty plea to a lesser offense—abusive sexual contact in Indian Country—reserving his right to appeal the statute of limitations issue.On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reviewed de novo whether the categorical approach or a case-specific analysis should be used to determine the applicability of § 3283’s extended statute of limitations. The court held that the categorical approach, typically used in sentencing and immigration contexts, does not apply to pretrial statute of limitations challenges under § 3283. Instead, a case-specific approach is appropriate, focusing on the facts and charges in the indictment. The court concluded that the offense charged involved the sexual abuse of a minor, so § 3283’s extended limitations period applied. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss. View "United States v. Tso" on Justia Law

Late one night, a homeowner called 911 to report that her security camera showed a Black man and woman taking items from her back porch. Within minutes, a police officer arrived and encountered Michael Campbell near the reported location. Campbell claimed to live at the residence and was uncooperative with the officer’s instructions, repeatedly dropping his hands and reaching for his wallet despite being told not to. The officer noticed what appeared to be a gun magazine in Campbell’s waistband and, after a brief exchange, frisked Campbell, discovering a firearm and a knife. Campbell was subsequently indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm.The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma denied Campbell’s motion to suppress the firearm, finding that the officer had reasonable suspicion to detain and frisk Campbell and that this suspicion had not dissipated before the frisk. Campbell was convicted at trial. At sentencing, the district court determined that Campbell’s five prior Oklahoma armed robbery convictions qualified as violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), subjecting him to a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence. Campbell was sentenced to 240 months, above the statutory maximum for the felon-in-possession offense but below the Guidelines range.On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of the suppression motion and upheld the constitutionality of the felon-in-possession statute. However, the Tenth Circuit held that Oklahoma armed robbery can be committed with a reckless state of mind and therefore does not categorically qualify as a violent felony under the ACCA’s elements clause. The court vacated Campbell’s sentence and remanded for resentencing, while affirming his conviction. View "United States v. Campbell" on Justia Law

Law enforcement officers stopped an individual for a traffic violation and, during the stop, discovered a small amount of cocaine and marijuana in his vehicle, along with over $23,000 in cash hidden in various locations. After his arrest, the individual admitted to law enforcement that he had purchased and distributed controlled substances and that about half of the seized money was from drug sales, with the remainder allegedly from a 401k and insurance settlement. A subsequent search of another vehicle he owned, prompted by his statements, led to the discovery of additional drugs and over $31,000 in cash. In total, $54,226 was seized. The individual was charged with and pled guilty to two counts of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance.The State of Wyoming initiated a civil forfeiture action in the District Court of Carbon County, seeking to forfeit the seized currency under the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act. The State alleged the money was either proceeds from drug sales or intended to facilitate further violations of the Act. After a bench trial, the district court ordered the forfeiture of the currency, applying a preponderance of the evidence standard to determine that the money was subject to forfeiture. The individual appealed, arguing that the district court applied the wrong burden of proof and improperly considered offenses beyond those for which he was convicted.The Supreme Court of Wyoming held that the district court erred by applying the preponderance of the evidence standard rather than the statutorily required clear and convincing evidence standard to determine whether the currency was subject to forfeiture. The court reversed the forfeiture order and remanded for further proceedings under the correct standard. The court also clarified that, in forfeiture proceedings, the district court may consider violations of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act beyond the specific offenses for which the individual was arrested or convicted. View "In the Matter of U.S. Currency Totaling $54,226.00" on Justia Law

A father was charged with multiple offenses after his daughter reported that he had sexually assaulted her repeatedly over many years, with the earliest incident she could recall occurring when she was in second grade. The prosecution focused on three specific incidents of sexual assault that took place when the victim was sixteen, each on a different date and in different locations. The victim provided detailed testimony about these three incidents, and additional evidence included an audio recording made by the victim during one of the assaults. After the victim disclosed the abuse to her mother, law enforcement became involved, and a grand jury indicted the defendant on nine counts: three counts each of gross sexual assault, domestic violence assault, and endangering the welfare of a child, each set corresponding to one of the three incidents.The case proceeded to a jury trial in the Sagadahoc County Unified Criminal Docket. The jury initially reported a partial deadlock but, after receiving a standard instruction for deadlocked juries, returned guilty verdicts on all nine counts. At sentencing, the court grouped the charges by incident date, imposed concurrent sentences within each group, and ordered the groups to run consecutively, resulting in an aggregate sentence of twenty-seven years, with all but seventeen years suspended and three years of probation. The defendant appealed both his convictions and his sentence, arguing that the trial court erred by not giving a specific unanimity instruction to the jury and by double counting the multiplicity of assaults during sentencing.The Maine Supreme Judicial Court reviewed the case and affirmed the judgment. The Court held that a specific unanimity instruction was not required because each count was tied to a distinct incident on a specific date, and the jury instructions sufficiently ensured unanimity. The Court also held that the sentencing court did not err by considering the number of assaults at different points in its analysis, as this was consistent with established sentencing practices and did not constitute impermissible double counting. View "State v. Chase" on Justia Law

Brandon Williams was charged with multiple crimes, including two counts of malice murder, following the deaths of Natalie Nation and her son, Cole Nation. Williams lived with his father and Natalie, while Cole sometimes stayed with them. On the night of the incident, witnesses heard Williams yelling threats at Natalie, including statements like “I’m going to kill all of you.” Later, Williams’s father found Natalie and Cole unconscious in Natalie’s room, with a towel tied around Natalie’s neck. Both victims died from asphyxia, and Cole also suffered blunt-force trauma. Williams was arrested at a nearby gas station, and his DNA was found on the towel used in the crime.After a jury trial in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Williams was found guilty on all counts. He was sentenced to consecutive life sentences without parole for the malice murder convictions. The trial court merged the remaining counts with the malice murder counts, though the felony murder counts were vacated by law and the cruelty to children count should not have merged. Williams’s motion for a new trial was denied, and he appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Williams’s claim that the trial court erred by admitting a hearsay statement under the residual hearsay exception. The statement, made by Natalie to a friend, described a prior incident in which Williams had choked her. The Supreme Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the statement, finding it met the requirements of trustworthiness, materiality, and probative value under OCGA § 24-8-807. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed Williams’s convictions. View "Williams v. State" on Justia Law

A group of teenagers and young adults devised a plan to rob and murder a man, Justin McKinney, and his girlfriend, Anna Franklin, as revenge for a drug-related incident involving one of the conspirators’ brothers. On the night of the crime, several of the group entered the victims’ home, where one participant shot and killed McKinney, and another shot and wounded Franklin. The group then fled, disposed of weapons, and made incriminating statements. Franklin survived and identified some of the assailants. Physical evidence, including firearms and shell casings, corroborated the events described by witnesses and participants.After the incident, several co-defendants pleaded guilty, while one was tried separately. The appellant, who was a juvenile at the time, was tried by a jury in the Superior Court of Fannin County and found guilty on all counts, including malice murder, attempted murder, and related offenses. He was sentenced to life in prison plus additional consecutive and concurrent terms. The trial court denied his motion for a new trial.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case. The appellant argued that his custodial statements should have been suppressed due to his age, learning disability, and other factors; that the trial court erred by modifying a pattern jury instruction to include “age” as a factor not to influence the jury; and that a post-incision autopsy photograph was improperly admitted. The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the trial court did not err in admitting the custodial statements, as the totality of the circumstances showed a knowing and voluntary waiver of rights. The Court also found no plain error in the jury instruction and no abuse of discretion in admitting the autopsy photograph. The convictions and sentences were affirmed. View "Hill v. State" on Justia Law

Two defendants were convicted by a jury of felony murder and related offenses after a fatal shooting outside a game room. The incident involved a physical altercation between the victim and the defendants, during which the victim was shot multiple times and his cell phone was taken. Eyewitnesses placed the defendants at the scene, described a fight immediately preceding the shooting, and identified one defendant as the shooter. DNA evidence linked one defendant to the victim, and both defendants gave inconsistent statements to investigators. The prosecution also introduced evidence of gang affiliation and suggested a motive related to the victim’s cooperation with law enforcement.The case was tried in the Superior Court of Emanuel County, where the jury found both defendants guilty on most counts. The trial court sentenced them to life imprisonment and denied their motions for new trial, except as to the gang-related charge, which the court found was not supported by sufficient evidence. The court’s rationale for reversing the gang conviction barred retrial on that count, and the State entered a nolle prosequi for it. The defendants appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission of certain testimony, and the denial of their motions for directed verdict and new trial.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the appeals. It held that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, was sufficient for a rational jury to find both defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, including as parties to the crimes. The Court found no error in the admission of prior inconsistent statements or in the trial court’s handling of the gang evidence. The Court also determined that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motions for new trial on the general grounds. The convictions were affirmed, except for the gang-related count, which was not at issue on appeal. View "Bostic v. State" on Justia Law

The case concerns a shooting that occurred in the early morning hours of February 2, 2017, following a series of arguments between Dwight Lewis and his former girlfriend, Dyreaka Tucker, regarding childcare. Witnesses, including a security guard familiar with both parties, observed heated exchanges between Lewis and Tucker, culminating in Lewis making a threatening remark. Shortly thereafter, as Tucker entered a car with friends, Lewis approached and fired into the vehicle, fatally striking Keosha Tinch. Tucker initially identified Lewis as the shooter to police and in her trial testimony, though she later recanted and gave inconsistent statements. Lewis fled the state and was apprehended in Detroit, where he provided false identification before admitting his identity.A Fulton County grand jury indicted Lewis on multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and weapons offenses. At trial in the Superior Court of Fulton County, a jury found Lewis guilty on all counts. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole, plus additional consecutive and concurrent terms for related offenses. Lewis’s motion for a new trial was denied after an evidentiary hearing.On appeal, the Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Lewis’s claims that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on voluntary manslaughter. The court held that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, was sufficient for a rational jury to find Lewis guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also held that, absent a written request, the trial court’s failure to instruct on a lesser offense was not plain error. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the convictions and sentences. View "Lewis v. State" on Justia Law

A group of teenagers, including the appellants, committed a series of armed robberies and a murder over a three-day period in October 2018 in Suwanee, Georgia. The crimes included the shooting death of Willian Tunchez and the robberies of four other individuals. The group, associated with the Gangster Disciples street gang, planned and executed these crimes, often using firearms and dividing the stolen proceeds. Evidence included testimony from accomplices, physical evidence recovered from the defendants’ residences, and digital evidence from cell phones and social media.Following these events, a Gwinnett County grand jury indicted several individuals on multiple counts, including malice murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and violations of the Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act. Some co-defendants agreed to testify for the State. After a joint jury trial in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County, the jury found the appellants guilty on most counts. The trial court sentenced both to life imprisonment without parole for malice murder, with additional concurrent and consecutive sentences for other offenses. The court merged certain counts for sentencing and vacated others by operation of law. Both appellants filed timely motions for new trial, which were denied, and then appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, and alleged sentencing errors. The Court held that there was sufficient direct evidence to support the convictions, that trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective, and that most sentencing decisions were correct. However, the Court found that the trial court erred by failing to merge one aggravated assault count with an armed robbery count for one appellant, vacating that sentence but otherwise affirming the convictions and sentences. View "Evans v. State" on Justia Law

The case concerns a shooting death that occurred on November 24, 2015. The victim, Jeffery Anderson, was found shot twice in the head at his residence. Investigators determined that Anderson was a member of the Nine Trey gang and owed money to Gordon Evans, who held a leadership position in the gang. Evidence showed that Evans ordered two fellow gang members, Dossie Mann and Durell Lewis, to kill Anderson after Anderson failed to repay the debt. Mann and Lewis carried out the murder, and Evans later attempted to prevent Mann from testifying by ordering another gang member to kill Mann and his family. Evans was indicted on multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, aggravated battery, false imprisonment, and criminal gang activity.The Superior Court of Gwinnett County held a jury trial in August 2018, where Evans was found guilty on all charges. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole for malice murder, with additional consecutive and concurrent sentences for other offenses. Evans filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied after a hearing in October 2024. He then appealed, challenging the admission of certain evidence and alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case. The court held that the admission of a letter found in Evans’s prison locker did not violate the Confrontation Clause because the author testified and was cross-examined. Any hearsay error was deemed harmless, as the evidence was cumulative. The court also found no abuse of discretion in admitting a handwriting expert’s testimony and upheld the admission of Mann’s videotaped interview under the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine. Evans’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were rejected. However, the court vacated the sentences for aggravated assault and aggravated battery, finding they should have merged with the murder conviction. The judgment was affirmed in part and vacated in part. View "Evans v. State" on Justia Law