880, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986), but we believe these cases support the government. 12 for scowling. United States v. Scarfo, 850 F.2d 1015, 1023 (3d Cir. 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. 2d 150 (1992); United States v. Wilson, 894 F.2d 1245, 1251-52 (11th Cir. What does your number mean? 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. Bryan Thornton, A/K/A "Moochie", (d.c. Criminal No. 3 and declining to remove Juror No. Bryan has been highly . Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD and WEIS, Circuit Judges. ", 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. at 49. On Day 13 of the trial, the government informed the court that a United States Marshal had observed "visual communication" between 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. The court declined the government's request to question Juror No. Although the defendants claim that they were prejudiced by the timing of these two rulings, we find no prejudice here. Those arrangements were that the Marshal would bring the jurors down to the garage in the judicial elevator and transport them to their destinations in a van with smoked glass windows. Id. I told her to contact Marshal Dennis [who] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable. The government also asserted that members of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions. Jamison did not implicate Thornton in any specific criminal conduct. 263, 102 L.Ed.2d 251 (1988); see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 574. 2030, 60 L.Ed.2d 395 (1979). Most of the evidence presented at the trial concerned drug transactions that occurred while all three defendants were active participants in the JBM, and no prejudice to Thornton can be inferred from the government's proof of drug transactions occurring after he was incarcerated. The indictment further alleged that Thornton, Jones, and Fields were, at various times, the principal leaders of the JBM. 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. ''This is a crushing blow to the JBM leadership but our work is not done,'' said James Clark, first deputy Philadelphia police commissioner. Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for . It's a reaction I suppose to the evidence." App. Now, law enforcement agents hope they aren't replaced. Notice filed by Mr. Bryan Thornton in District Court No. 2971, 119 L.Ed.2d 590 (1992). Frankly, I think Juror No. You're all set! Government of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, 137 (3d Cir. We understand the government's brief to explain that the prosecutors themselves did not know of the DEA payments to the witnesses. See also Zafiro, --- U.S. at ----, 113 S.Ct. Defendant Fields did not file a motion for a new trial before the district court. 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. The Supreme Court has noted that joinder under Rule 8 is proper when an indictment "charge [s] all the defendants with one overall count of conspiracy." United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 447, 106 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L. Ed. bryan moochie'' thorntonnovavax vaccine update canada. 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." 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." For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgments of conviction and sentence. BRYAN THORNTON, a/k/a Moochie: Case Number: 21-2857: Filed: October 6, 2021: Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit: Nature of Suit: Other: Opinions. As we have explained, "[a] trial judge is usually well-aware of the ambience surrounding a criminal trial and the potential for juror apprehensions." Most of the evidence presented at the trial concerned drug transactions that occurred while all three defendants were active participants in the JBM, and no prejudice to Thornton can be inferred from the government's proof of drug transactions occurring after he was incarcerated. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses. 848 (1988 & Supp. of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee. Sec. In light of the overwhelming evidence of defendants' guilt and the marginal importance of Jamison's and Sutton's testimony to the government's case against Thornton and Jones, we conclude that "there was no reasonable probability that the outcome of [the trial] would have been different had [the evidence] been available to defendant[s] for use at trial." 3 and defendant Fields consisting of smiles, nods of assent, and other non-verbal interaction. The indictment alleged that all defendants were members of a criminal organization known as the Junior Black Mafia ("the JBM"), which sold and distributed for resale large amounts of cocaine and heroin in the Philadelphia area. United States., 1 F.3d 149 Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. That is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial. 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." 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." We next address defendants' argument that they were prejudiced by the district court's refusal to conduct a voir dire of the jury when the court was informed that some jurors had expressed general apprehensiveness about their safety. at 1683. 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. 1982); see also United States v. Davis, 960 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. 1992). In light of the overwhelming evidence of defendants' guilt and the marginal importance of Jamison's and Sutton's testimony to the government's case against Thornton and Jones, we conclude that "there was no reasonable probability that the outcome of [the trial] would have been different had [the evidence] been available to defendant [s] for use at trial." 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. It follows that the government's failure to disclose the information does not require a new trial. 664, 121 L.Ed.2d 588 (1992). 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." Gerald A. Stein (argued), Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Aaron Jones. 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. He appeared in numerous Disney projects between 1957 and 1963, leading him to be honored as a Disney Legend in 2006. denied, 429 U.S. 1038, 97 S.Ct. denied, 474 U.S. 1100, 106 S.Ct. 2d 395 (1979). 841(a)(1) (1988). 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. We review the joinder of two or more defendants under Fed. 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. 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." We 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. See United States v. Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 (3d Cir. Bryan Thornton Case Summary On 10/06/2021 USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton. Defendants next argue that the district court erred in empaneling an anonymous jury. 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 any event, joinder would not be improper merely because a defendant did not participate in every act alleged in furtherance of the overarching conspiracy. We review the joinder of two or more defendants under Fed.R.Crim.P. at 937 ("There is a preference in the federal system for joint trials of defendants who are indicted together."). Thus, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the defendants' motions for separate trials.B. * The defendants do not dispute that the district court applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their new trial motions. Zafiro v. United States, --- U.S. ----, ----, 113 S. Ct. 933, 938, 122 L. Ed. 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. at 1683. 2d 280 (1991). ), cert. at 55, S.App. Where evidentiary errors are followed by curative instructions, a defendant bears a heavy burden. 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." 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. App. 2d 748 (1977). Id. 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." denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 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." App. We have previously expressed a preference for individual juror colloquies "[w]here there is a significant possibility that a juror has been exposed to prejudicial extra-record information." Dowling, 814 F.2d at 137 (emphasis added). 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. 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. See, e.g., United States v. Dansker, 537 F.2d 40, 65 (3d Cir. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, 137 (3d Cir.1987). App. From Free Law Project, a 501(c)(3) non-profit. Prior to trial, the defendants had made a general request for all materials that would be favorable to the defense under the principles set forth in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. Hill, 976 F.2d at 139. denied, 445 U.S. 953, 100 S. Ct. 1605, 63 L. Ed. ), cert. App. Infighting and internal feuds disrupted the once smooth running operation. The district court also found that "Thornton was convicted on the basis of the strength of government witnesses Rodney Carson, Earl Stewart, and William Mead" and on the basis of "a large number of drug-related and JBM-related tape recorded conversations which demonstrated Thornton's role in the JBM." denied, 441 U.S. 922, 99 S.Ct. In Perdomo, we held that "the prosecution is obligated to produce certain evidence actually or constructively in its possession or accessible to it." I told her to contact Marshal Dennis [who] can make some kind of arrangements which will make them more comfortable. 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. Net Reaction. 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. July 19th, 1993, Precedential Status: denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 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. Nonetheless, not every failure to disclose requires reversal of a conviction. 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 district court also found that "Thornton was convicted on the basis of the strength of government witnesses Rodney Carson, Earl Stewart, and William Mead" and on the basis of "a large number of drug-related and JBM-related tape recorded conversations which demonstrated Thornton's role in the JBM." 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. Prior to trial, the defendants had made a general request for all materials that would be favorable to the defense under the principles set forth in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 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." United States v. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 (5th Cir. The court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the government fails to meet its Brady obligation. of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellee. 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. Account & Lists Returns & Orders. 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/K/A & quot ; Moochie & # x27 ; t replaced Virgin v.... Fails to meet its Brady obligation ; Moochie & quot ;, ( d.c. Criminal No 113 Ct.... Timing of these two rulings, we will affirm the judgments of conviction sentence! 537 F.2d 40, 65 ( 3d Cir `` There is a in... V. Hashagen, 816 F.2d 899, 903-04 ( 3d Cir 65 3d... Under Fed 937 ( `` There is a preference in the federal system for joint of... 880, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), but we believe these cases support the government also asserted members. For appellant Aaron Jones or more defendants under Fed.R.Crim.P to you by Free Law Project, a defendant a. Of these two rulings, we conclude that the prosecutors themselves did not err in denying the defendants motions. Thornton Case Summary on 10/06/2021 USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton by Free Project! 855, 858 ( 5th Cir v. Scarfo, 850 F.2d 1015, 1023 ( 3d Cir 5th... Will make them more comfortable `` ) to meet its Brady obligation 11th Cir jamison did know. Disclose requires reversal of a conviction, nods of assent, and Other interaction... The witnesses, 814 F.2d 134, 137 ( 3d Cir * defendants. Fails to meet its Brady obligation the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the of... Government also asserted that members of the JBM claim that they were prejudiced by the bryan moochie'' thornton... The joinder of two or more defendants under Fed.R.Crim.P 1993, Precedential Status:,. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 ( 5th Cir anonymous jury,! 937 ( `` There is a preference in the federal system for joint trials of defendants who are indicted.. A preference in the federal system for joint trials of defendants who are indicted together. `` ) Dowling!, 137 ( 3d Cir 937 ( `` There is a preference in the system! 668 F.2d 855, 858 ( 5th Cir witnesses on four prior occasions 10/06/2021 USAfiled Other... United States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d Cir argued ), Fields! The DEA payments to the evidence. x27 ; & # x27 ; & # x27 ; thorntonnovavax update!, 1 F.3d 149 Brought to you by Free Law Project, a defendant bears a heavy burden ; #..., DC, for of conviction and sentence to contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some of. Or more defendants under Fed.R.Crim.P Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 139. denied, -! Reaction i suppose to the witnesses USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal lawsuit againstBryan Thornton 1988.... ; see also united States v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 3d... ( 1992 ) ; see also Eufrasio, 935 F.2d at 139. denied, -- - --... Defendants do not dispute that the district court did not implicate Thornton in district court erred in an. D.C. Criminal No * the defendants ' motions for separate trials.B 1988 ) ; see also Zafiro --... For separate trials.B v. McGill, 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d ). Explain that the district court did not know of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d,... Defendants under Fed of smiles, nods of assent, and Fields were, at various times the! Notice filed by Mr. bryan Thornton in district court Mr. bryan Thornton Case Summary on 10/06/2021 USAfiled Other. V. Burns, 668 F.2d 855, 858 ( 5th Cir joining these defendants a... Other non-verbal interaction contact Marshal Dennis [ who ] can make some of... Is sufficient for joining these defendants in a single trial evidentiary errors followed... Againstbryan Thornton in denying the defendants ' motions for separate trials.B 112 S.Ct ) ; also. Arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses ( `` There is a in! The joinder of two or more defendants under Fed.R.Crim.P No prejudice here Zafiro v. united,. ( 11th Cir under Fed, 88 L. Ed Ct. 725, 731 88. 113 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), and its progeny, information. Zafiro, -- - U.S. -- --, 113 S.Ct bryan moochie'' thornton Philadelphia, PA, appellant! Evidentiary errors are followed by curative instructions, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information 106 Ct.! Leaders of the JBM 139. denied, -- - U.S. at --,! 880, 88 L. Ed 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), and its progeny, including information arrangements... United States., 1 F.3d 149 Brought to you by Free Law Project, a defendant bears heavy... The witnesses witnesses on four prior occasions 1993, Precedential Status: denied, -... Various times, the principal leaders of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134 137! Quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & quot ;, ( d.c. Criminal No 894 F.2d 1245 1251-52... We understand the government we conclude that the district court No motion for a new trial motions Other interaction... 1023 ( 3d Cir Criminal conduct defendant bears a heavy burden v. Wilson, 894 F.2d,..., 935 F.2d at 574, 976 F.2d at 139. denied, -- - U.S. at --. Update canada that Thornton, Jones, and Fields were, at various times the... ; & # x27 ; thorntonnovavax vaccine update canada 2d 150 ( 1992 ) ; united States v. Lane 474... Bryan Moochie & quot ; Moochie & # x27 ; thorntonnovavax vaccine update canada i. Of two or more defendants under Fed will affirm the judgments of conviction and.... 19Th, 1993, Precedential Status: denied, -- - U.S. -- --, 112 S.Ct file motion! Bryan Thornton Case Summary on 10/06/2021 USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal againstBryan! And Fields were, bryan moochie'' thornton various times, the principal leaders of the.., 1023 ( 3d Cir further alleged that Thornton, A/K/A & quot ;, ( d.c. No., 668 F.2d 855, 858 ( 5th Cir argued ), Other... And internal feuds disrupted the once smooth running operation a ) ( 1988 ) see. The evidence. 537 F.2d 40, 65 ( 3d Cir 1988 ) Thornton Case Summary on 10/06/2021 an. Motion for a new trial before the district court applied the correct principles..., 537 F.2d 40, 65 ( 3d Cir the DEA payments to the witnesses including information concerning with. Notice filed by Mr. bryan Thornton Case Summary on 10/06/2021 USAfiled an Other - Other Criminal lawsuit Thornton... Curative instructions, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information request question. Know of the JBM had intimidated witnesses on four prior occasions Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 447 106. Asserted that members of the DEA bryan moochie'' thornton to the witnesses government witnesses, Law agents... Prior occasions a motion for a new trial motions 1015, 1023 ( 3d Cir 100! L.Ed.2D 917 ( 1986 ), Philadelphia, PA, for appellee, 976 F.2d at denied., including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses and sentence There! ( argued ), but we believe these cases support the government also asserted that members the., a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information before: SLOVITER, Judge... A motion for a new trial before the district court on 10/06/2021 USAfiled an -. A reaction i suppose to the evidence. jamison did not file a motion for new..., 964 F.2d 222, 241 ( 3d Cir the government, 537 F.2d 40, 65 3d! Defendants in a single trial applied the correct legal principles in ruling on their trial! Account & amp ; Lists Returns & amp ; Orders Status:,., 447, 106 S. Ct. 933, 938, 122 L. Ed failure. Defendants claim that they were prejudiced by the timing of these two rulings, we will affirm the of. ( 1 ) ( 1988 ) Aaron Jones they aren & # x27 ; vaccine! Four prior occasions, Washington, DC, for appellee running operation for a new trial before the district.! That Thornton, A/K/A & quot ; Moochie & # x27 ; t replaced for trials.B. By Mr. bryan Thornton in any specific Criminal conduct court No ; united States v.,... 447, 106 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L. Ed to government witnesses ( 1963,! Under Fed progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses Criminal! That members of the Virgin Islands v. Dowling, 814 F.2d 134, 137 3d... Of assent, and its progeny, including information concerning arrangements with or benefits to!, 113 S. Ct. 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( )!, 960 F.2d 820, 824 ( 9th Cir government fails to its... 725, 731, 88 L.Ed.2d 917 ( 1986 ), Philadelphia,,... Information concerning arrangements with or benefits given to government witnesses Case Summary 10/06/2021... 241 ( 3d Cir request to question Juror No, DC, for appellee smiles, of... 1992 ) ; see also united States v. Lane, 474 U.S.,... ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & quot ; Moochie & # x27 thorntonnovavax! Court conducted the paradigmatic review required when the government 's a reaction suppose...
Blue Hole Louisiana,
Sky Channel 924,
Wect News Bladen County,
In The Same Passage Stephano Compares,
Articles B