United States v. Buck Otto White
816 F.3d 976
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- Buck Otto White was indicted for being a felon in possession of firearms/ammunition (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and possessing stolen firearms/ammunition (18 U.S.C. § 922(j)) after police tracked his minivan by GPS and executed searches of his storage unit, car, and home.
- Investigators found numerous stolen items in White’s leased storage unit (including multiple firearms and ammunition) and in his car and home (bolt cutters, stolen surveillance camera, tackle boxes, >200 rounds of ammo).
- Owners of burglarized properties (including Kenneth Nevins and Robert Ploog) identified many items as theirs; some items bore distinctive owner markings that matched items in White’s unit.
- At trial White conceded possession of the storage unit and some items but claimed he did not know who placed the stolen property there and others had access to the unit.
- The district court admitted evidence of other stolen items over White’s Rule 404(b) objection, the jury convicted on all counts, the court applied a 4-level USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement (possession in connection with another felony), and sentenced White to 300 months (downward variance from guideline range).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other-crimes evidence under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) | Admission violated Rule 404(b); late notice | Evidence intrinsic or admissible to prove intent, knowledge, lack of mistake; notice was adequate | Admission not an abuse of discretion; evidence met 404(b) criteria and notice was reasonable |
| Sufficiency of evidence / motion for judgment of acquittal | Government failed to prove White knowingly possessed firearms/ammo or knew they were stolen | Items were found in White’s controlled locations; circumstantial evidence supports knowledge and belief they were stolen | Verdict supported: reasonable jury could find constructive/knowing possession and that White knew or reasonably should have known items were stolen |
| Guidelines enhancement under USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (possession in connection with another felony) | Enhancement clearly erroneous because burglary not proven beyond reasonable doubt; no fingerprint/DNA or burglary charge | Preponderance standard for sentencing; extensive circumstantial evidence supported finding he committed burglary connected to the firearms | No clear error: district court properly applied enhancement based on preponderance of evidence |
| Substantive reasonableness of 300-month sentence | District court should have given greater weight to age, nonviolent record, treatment needs, and allegedly minor prior offenses | Court considered mitigating arguments but weighed them against 30 prior felony convictions and public safety concerns; court granted a downward variance | Sentence substantively reasonable and not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Brumfield, 686 F.3d 960 (8th Cir. 2012) (four-part test for admissibility of other-act evidence under Rule 404(b))
- United States v. Brooks, 715 F.3d 1069 (8th Cir. 2013) (distinguishing intrinsic evidence from Rule 404(b) evidence)
- United States v. Phelps, 168 F.3d 1048 (8th Cir. 1999) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (procedural and substantive reasonableness framework for sentencing review)
- United States v. Holm, 745 F.3d 938 (8th Cir. 2014) (sentencing enhancements must be supported by preponderance of evidence; review for clear error)
- United States v. Battle, 774 F.3d 504 (8th Cir. 2014) (constructive possession and proof of knowing possession)