United States v. Benjamin Grey
891 F.3d 1054
D.C. Cir.2018Background
- Benjamin Grey ran schemes (using entities like Planet Cars and GreyMaxx) where victims took out auto loans and handed proceeds to Grey; victims received no cars or refunds. Several victims sued; one obtained a default judgment in D.C. Superior Court.
- At trial the government presented victim testimony, bank records, loan documents, and two Rule 404(b) witnesses describing similar uncharged acts.
- The district court allowed two 404(b) acts after limiting the government’s proposed five; the court repeatedly instructed the jury on the limited purpose of that evidence.
- Grey presented no defense; a jury convicted him on 21 counts (wire fraud, bank fraud, false loan statement, D.C. first-degree fraud).
- Sentenced to 102 months imprisonment and 60 months supervised release; Grey appealed challenging evidentiary rulings and ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Grey) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of civil default judgment (Williams) | Judgment was hearsay, irrelevant, and highly prejudicial | Judgment explained victim’s behavior and supported credibility | Admission was plain error but harmless given overwhelming independent evidence; conviction affirmed |
| Admission of 404(b) evidence (Esbaitah, Kolius) | Esbaitah was cumulative; Kolius involved a different scheme and was unfairly prejudicial | Evidence showed intent and pattern; court limited acts and instructed jury | Court did not abuse discretion as to Esbaitah; Kolius’s admission, if error, was harmless |
| Admission of testimony about victims’ financial/emotional harm | Testimony was only to elicit sympathy and was unduly prejudicial | Harms are relevant to intent and show scheme’s effect; limited probative value | Any error was harmless given the brevity of testimony and overwhelming proof |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel failed to object to key evidentiary errors, warranting reversal/remand | Even if counsel erred, Strickland prejudice not shown; record shows guilt overwhelming | No relief; record makes ineffectiveness claim plainly without merit — no remand needed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. King-Gore, 875 F.3d 1141 (D.C. Cir.) (plain-error standard described)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (U.S. 2009) (plain-error framework authority)
- United States v. Sine, 493 F.3d 1021 (9th Cir. 2007) (civil judgments inadmissible hearsay when offered for truth)
- Greycas, Inc. v. Proud, 826 F.2d 1560 (7th Cir. 1987) (discussing prejudice from admitting prior judgments)
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (U.S. 1988) (admissibility of extrinsic acts to prove intent)
- United States v. Brown, 508 F.3d 1066 (D.C. Cir.) (plain-error discussion)
- United States v. Linares, 367 F.3d 941 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (harmless-error standard for nonconstitutional errors)
- Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (U.S. 1946) (substantial and injurious effect standard for harmless error)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance prejudice standard)
- United States v. Weaver, 281 F.3d 228 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (remand practice for ineffective-assistance claims)