United States v. Bumphus
4:23-cr-00054
| E.D. Va. | May 12, 2025Background
- Cortez Dayshawn Bumphus was indicted in the Eastern District of Virginia for numerous drug, firearm, and money laundering offenses as part of a large drug trafficking conspiracy.
- A Second Superseding Indictment was filed, charging Bumphus with additional counts, including Conspiracy and Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE), as well as multiple firearm and drug-related charges.
- Bumphus filed a motion to dismiss Counts Two (Conspiracy) and Seventeen (firearm possession related to drug trafficking), arguing they are multiplicitous.
- He claimed Count Two (Conspiracy) is a lesser included offense of CCE (Count One) and should be dismissed pretrial, and that Counts Seventeen and Nineteen are duplicative because they charge the same conduct under different locations.
- Bumphus also argued Count Seventeen was impermissibly vague for lack of factual detail.
- The Government opposed dismissal, and the court considered whether pretrial dismissals for multiplicity or vagueness were warranted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multiplicity—Count Two (Conspiracy) | Count 2 should stand; can prosecute both | Dismiss as lesser-included offense of Count 1 | Motion denied; may prosecute both, cannot convict on both if found guilty on greater offense |
| Multiplicity—Counts 17 & 19 (Firearm) | Separate crimes based on different locations | Counts charge same conduct, should be dismissed | Motion denied; premature to dismiss pretrial |
| Vagueness—Count Seventeen | Indictment is sufficient | Indictment is impermissibly vague | Motion denied; indictment sufficiently informs of charges |
Key Cases Cited
- Jeffers v. United States, 432 U.S. 137 (Supreme Court holds that conspiracy under § 846 is a lesser-included offense of CCE under § 848)
- United States v. Leifried, 732 F.2d 388 (4th Cir. confirms lesser-included offenses can be prosecuted but cannot stand if greater offense is convicted)
- United States v. Johnson, 130 F.3d 1420 (10th Cir. states district court discretion on pretrial dismissal of multiplicitous counts)
- Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 (Supreme Court outlines Double Jeopardy Clause protections)
- United States v. Gordon, 780 F.2d 1165 (5th Cir. on sufficiency of indictment to notify defendant of charges)