United States v. Bennett
664 F.3d 997
5th Cir.2011Background
- Defendants Bennett, Bennett, and Miller charged with conspiracy to distribute crack and related offenses.
- During jury selection the Government challenged Defendants’ peremptory strikes as racially motivated.
- District court re-seated two white jurors after ruling Defendants struck whites for race.
- Trial resulted in convictions on Count One and multiple other counts; jury composition remained largely white.
- Post-trial, Defendants appealed Batson reverse-Batson rulings, suppression rulings, and sentences.
- FSA retroactivity issue discussed for Dalton’s and Lance’s sentences; rulings favorable to the Government on several issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May a Black defendant strike white jurors under Batson McCollum | Government argues Batson/McCollum apply; discrimination proven | Bennett contends no substantial Batson error | Discrimination prohibited; reverse-Batson applies; equality protected |
| Was district court's Batson three-step application proper | District court properly applied steps | District court misapplied steps; pretext shown | District court's analysis affirmed; racially biased strikes found |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Lance on obstruction conspiracy | Evidentiary nexus shown between affidavit and proceeding | No nexus proved | Sufficient nexus; conviction affirmed |
| Miller's sentence under Count Six consecutive to Count One | Departures justified by co-defendants’ sentences to avoid disparity | Consecutive sentence excessive | Not abuse of discretion; sentence affirmed |
| retroactivity of Fair Sentencing Act to prior sentences | FSA applies retroactively to enhance penalties | FSA not retroactive to pre-enactment conduct | FSA not retroactive; sentences upheld under prior law |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (prohibits racially motivated peremptory challenges)
- McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (U.S. 1992) (extends Batson to defendants; dignity and integrity concerns)
- Bentley-Smith, 2 F.3d 1368 (5th Cir. 1993) (reverses on Batson/McCollum standard; deference to district court on credibility)
- Purkett v. Elem., 514 U.S. 765 (U.S. 1995) (limits requirement of plausible explanations in step two)
- United States v. Lance, 853 F.2d 1177 (5th Cir. 1988) (pretext analysis guidance on race-neutral explanations)