Collins v. United States
73 A.3d 974
| D.C. | 2013Background
- Appellant Jamontie Collins challenges multiple convictions from an assault and robbery at the Red Roof Inn and related events.
- Conspiracy-based Pinkerton liability was instructed for several counts tied to co-conspirators.
- The government alleged a conspiracy to rob Wooten and Brown, and to use a gunman in the assault.
- Video and eyewitness evidence depicted a coordinated attack with multiple participants and a pre-existing plan.
- The court found sufficiency for Pinkerton liability but vacated one ASBI conviction that merged into aggravated assault.
- The case proceeded in trial court with assorted conspiracy and aiding-and-abetting theories and concluded with a concurrent sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conspiracy liability instruction validity under Apprendi/Cotton | Collins argues Pinkerton liability improperly used | State maintains no indictment element required for conspiracy theory | Plain error not established; theory valid despite no indictment element |
| Indictment sufficiency to support conspiracy theory | Indictment failed to allege conspiracy elements | Evidence supports existence of conspiracy despite indictment form | Indictment not required to include conspiracy elements; sufficient evidence supports conspiracy theory |
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy liability | Evidence insufficient to prove agreement to rob | Evidence shows group coordination and agreement | Sufficient evidence supports conspiracy liability under Pinkerton |
| Merger of ASBI with aggravated assault against Brown | ASBI should stand separate from aggravated assault | ASBI is a lesser-included offense of aggravated assault | ASBI merged into aggravated assault; remanded to vacate ASBI conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilson-Bey v. United States, 903 A.2d 840 (D.C.2006) (conspiracy liability elements and Pinkerton standard)
- Thomas v. United States, 748 A.2d 931 (D.C.2000) (no conspiracy charge required to pursue Pinkerton theory at trial)
- Baker v. United States, 867 A.2d 988 (D.C.2005) (conspiracy theory not an element that must be charged in indictment; Apprendi/Cotton limits not controlling)
- Mendelson v. United States, 58 F.2d 532 (D.C.Cir.1932) (latecomer conspirator may be liable if knowingly joined)