Harrison v. United States
2012 D.C. App. LEXIS 636
| D.C. | 2012Background
- Harrison was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder and additional charges, including obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
- On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for obstruction and conspiracy, and asserts reversible errors in an evidentiary ruling and in the government's closing argument.
- The murder occurred September 24, 2007 in DC; victim Hill suffered five gunshot wounds; bullets and firearm evidence were collected at the scene.
- Keith West Jr., friends with Harrison, testified about the events; he initially lied to investigators but later signed a statement identifying Harrison as the shooter.
- Aghu, a cooperating witness, testified to statements Harrison allegedly made about Hill and the dice games; police recovered a 9mm Luger and shell casings tied to the scene.
- The government presented jailhouse calls between Harrison and his father, and an in-person conversation between Harrison’s uncle and West Sr., which the prosecution argued evidenced an agreement to obstruct testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence establishes specific intent to obstruct | Harrison argues no direct proof of intent; circumstantial evidence insufficient | State argues inferences from jail calls and related conversations show intent | Conspiracy and obstruction convictions vacated; no proof beyond reasonable doubt of specific intent |
| Sufficiency of circumstantial evidence under reasonable doubt standard | Evidence relies on minimizing conjecture; improper inferences | Circumstantial evidence supports intent beyond reasonable doubt | Record weakened; no rational juror could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt |
| Admission of prior consistent statements on redirect examination | Redirect allowed bolstering credibility via grand jury-consistent statements | Court abused discretion permitting rehabilitative redirect | Any error deemed harmless; no substantial prejudice given strong other evidence |
| Closing arguments and alleged improper bolstering of credibility | Prosecutor injected facts not in evidence to bolster West Jr.'s credibility | Arguments were permissible or harmless; trial court had latitude | Four of the five challenged statements were permissible; one statement found improper but not reversible |
| Remedy for reversible errors | Convictions should stand unless error undermines entire verdict | Certain convictions should be vacated due to evidentiary and argument errors | Conspiracy and obstruction convictions vacated and judgments of acquittal entered on those counts; other convictions affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Griffin v. United States, 861 A.2d 610 (DC App. 2004) (scrutiny of intent in conspiracy cases; not to be inferred from mere inferences)
- Green v. United States, 651 A.2d 817 (DC 1994) (no rational basis to infer eigen author of threat from indirect evidence)
- Rivas v. United States, 783 A.2d 125 (DC 2001) (beyond reasonable doubt standard; avoid speculative inferences)
- Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211 (Supreme Court 1974) (special care in proving specific intent in conspiracy cases)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (Supreme Court 1979) (standard for determining sufficiency of evidence)
- Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (Supreme Court 1946) (harmless error standard for closing arguments; evaluation framework)
- Clayborne v. United States, 751 A.2d 956 (DC App. 2000) (closing argument evaluation; factors for determining error)
- Sherer v. United States, 470 A.2d 732 (DC 1983) (limits on rehabilitating credibility via prior consistent statements)
- Piazza v. People, 422 N.E.2d 700 (NY 1979) (limitations on circumstantial inferences; beware speculation)