United States v. Calvin Smith
804 F.3d 724
| 5th Cir. | 2015Background
- Calvin Louis Smith, a Canton, MS alderman, was recorded accepting $1,500 and agreeing to accept $3,000 total to influence award of a 2012 city ditch‑spraying contract; cooperating witness Michael Bouldin recorded meetings at FBI request.
- Smith was indicted and convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) for soliciting/accepting a bribe.
- Proving § 666 required the Government to show the City of Canton received > $10,000 in federal funds in a 12‑month period; the Government relied on testimony of Canton City Clerk Valerie Smith and a city revenue ledger (admitted as a business record).
- Defense challenged admissibility of the ledger (trustworthiness and best‑evidence concerns), sufficiency of evidence on the federal‑funds element, admission of evidence about an uncharged land‑sale bribe under Rule 404(b), and a two‑level § 3C1.1 obstruction enhancement based on alleged perjury.
- The district court admitted the ledger under Rule 803(6), allowed the 404(b) evidence as probative of intent, denied Rule 29 motions, imposed a two‑level obstruction enhancement, and sentenced Smith; the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Govt's Argument | Smith's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of city revenue ledger under Rule 803(6) and trustworthiness | Ledger is a regular business record; clerk’s testimony shows foundation and trustworthiness | Ledger unreliable because clerk did not verify underlying documents and miscategorized some funds | Admitted: district court did not abuse discretion; accuracy challenges go to weight not admissibility |
| Applicability of best‑evidence rule (Rule 1002) | Rule 1002 inapplicable because ledger and testimony proved receipt of funds (an event), not contents of another writing | Govt should have produced underlying supporting documents (originals) | Rule 1002 does not apply; ledger/testimony properly used to prove receipt of funds |
| Sufficiency of evidence that Canton received > $10,000 federal funds (Rule 29) | Clerk testified City received a $66,256.74 DOJ grant and ~$22,791 VOCA grant; ledger corroborated; defendant even admitted city received > $10,000 | Clerk’s testimony was unverified and equivocal on VOCA funds; lacking documentary proof; cross‑examination undermined reliability | Sufficient evidence exists (Clerk’s uncontradicted testimony about DOJ grant alone, ledger, and defendant’s admission); denial of Rule 29 affirmed |
| Admissibility of evidence of an uncharged land‑sale bribe (Rule 404(b)/403) | Conversations and recordings showed Smith agreed to take $2,000 for land deal; evidence probative of intent and not unduly prejudicial | Evidence speculative, prejudicial, and insufficient to show the uncharged bribe occurred | Admissible: Govt proved the act by a preponderance; evidence was relevant to intent, similar to charged conduct, contemporaneous, and jury limiting instructions mitigated prejudice |
| Sentencing enhancement for obstruction (§ 3C1.1) based on perjury | Smith’s trial testimony that payments were loans contradicted taped statements, other witnesses, and jury verdict—supports willful false testimony | Enhancement punishes right to testify; alleged admissions to FBI not adopted in writing; inconsistencies reflect mistake or faulty memory | Enhancement upheld: district court’s perjury finding was plausible given tapes, witness contradictions, and credibility findings; not clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jackson, 313 F.3d 231 (5th Cir.) (insufficiency where evidence left uncertainty about federal source and timing of funds)
- United States v. Brown, 727 F.3d 329 (5th Cir.) (sparse but unchallenged testimonial proof of federal funds can be sufficient)
- United States v. Duncan, 919 F.2d 981 (5th Cir. 1990) (wide district court latitude in assessing trustworthiness for Rule 803(6))
- United States v. Beechum, 582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir.) (framework for admitting uncharged‑act evidence under Rule 404(b) and balancing under Rule 403)
- United States v. Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87 (1993) (definition of perjury for § 3C1.1 purposes requires willful false testimony on a material matter)
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988) (standard that proof of uncharged offense for Rule 404(b) need only permit a jury to reasonably find the act occurred by a preponderance)