9 F.4th 590
8th Cir.2021Background
- Mink engaged in prolonged harassment of his ex-girlfriend L.L. and her partner D.B., including alleged stabbing, vandalism, and placement of mothballs and putty; surveillance tied a stolen red box truck to a collision and flight from the scene.
- Investigators found bomb‑making books bearing Mink’s fingerprint, a backpack with multiple pipe bombs and explosive material near Holy Family Cemetery, and similar pipe bombs at the Quad City Inn; a blue rental car tied Mink to the motel area.
- Additional forensic and circumstantial links: a .45 pistol barrel from a coworker’s missing firearm (with an after‑market barrel), Hornady “Zombie Max” ammunition, Mink’s laptop activity, purchases made using another person’s identity (T.S.), and items (solvent trap adaptor, threaded barrels) bought with that fraudulent account.
- Mink was indicted on 15 counts (stolen vehicle/vehicular assault; stalking; interstate domestic violence; possession/receipt of unregistered destructive devices; fraudulent use of ID; malicious use/possession of explosives; firearm possession in furtherance of a crime of violence; obstruction and witness tampering), tried, convicted on all counts, and sentenced to 600 months; he appealed.
- The Eighth Circuit affirmed most convictions but vacated Count 8 (§ 924(c) conviction) because the predicate (§ 844(i) arson) does not qualify as a "crime of violence" for § 924(c), and vacated the entire sentence under the sentencing‑package doctrine for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Gov't) | Defendant's Argument (Mink) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venue for Count 6 (§1028(a)(7) fraudulent use of ID) | Venue proper in S.D. Iowa because essential conduct included possession/use of ID and predicate felon‑in‑possession conduct occurred in Iowa | Mink argued all essential acts (application/receipt/use of card) occurred in Illinois so venue in S.D. Iowa improper | Affirmed venue: predicate §922(g) possession in Iowa supplies proper venue basis alongside ID use |
| Multiplicity (double jeopardy) | Counts are timely and not multiplicitous; challenges waived if not timely raised | Mink argued certain counts merge under Blockburger | Waived — defendant failed to timely move pretrial; appellate review declined |
| Joinder/Severance under Rules 8(a)/14 | Counts properly joined as part of common scheme to harass L.L./D.B.; evidence of other acts admissible as intrinsic/contextual | Mink argued Counts 1–3 unrelated and cumulative prejudice required severance | Joinder proper; denial of severance not an abuse: evidence admissible to show motive/plan/identity and not unfairly prejudicial |
| Admission of incarceration evidence (for obstruction counts) | Probative to link Mink to events and explain communications from FCI Milan; limiting instruction given | Mink argued incarceration unduly prejudicial under Rule 403 | No abuse of discretion: probative value > prejudice; proper limiting instruction reduced risk |
| Admission of uncharged conduct (vandalism, putty, stolen firearm) | Evidence intrinsic — provides context and completes the narrative so admissible, not Rule 404(b) propensity evidence | Mink argued Rule 404(b) and Rule 403 barred propensity and prejudicial gap‑filler evidence | No plain error: evidence intrinsic and admissible for context; not substantially more prejudicial than probative |
| Voir dire/venire bias | Prosecutorial office clerk removed for cause; no systemic taint | Mink argued venire should be dismissed because of prejudicial comment about prosecutors and defense counsel | No abuse of discretion: comment was isolated, not expert‑like about guilt, and struck; no need to restart venire |
| Sufficiency: Count 6 (ID use) and Counts 14–15 (tampering/obstruction) | Evidence showed use of T.S.’s name/SSN/DOB to obtain card and purchases; phone calls/letters instructed destruction of evidence and false affidavit, showing contemplation of an official proceeding | Mink argued debit card didn’t identify another person; and no official proceeding contemplated | Guilty verdicts upheld: ID was a "means of identification" and Mink’s acts showed contemplation of a foreseeable official proceeding |
| Jury instructions / mens rea (Rehaif) | Instructions adequate overall; possession and "knowing" elements conveyed in definitions; defendant stipulated to felon status | Mink argued omission of felon‑status mens rea (Rehaif) and other mens rea defects required reversal | Court recognized plain Rehaif error but found no prejudice (defendant had stipulated and testified to felonies); no reversible plain error |
| Count 8 (§924(c) possession in furtherance of crime of violence) | Government conceded §844(i) arson may cover arson of one’s own property and thus does not meet §924(c)’s crime‑of‑violence requirement | Mink argued predicate not a valid crime of violence | Conviction on Count 8 vacated; sentencing package doctrine applied and entire sentence vacated for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Cabrales, 524 U.S. 1 (1998) (locus delicti determined from nature and location of the acts for venue)
- United States v. Rodriguez‑Moreno, 526 U.S. 275 (1999) (only essential conduct elements may establish venue)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (test for multiplicity/double jeopardy)
- Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) (defendant must know felon status for §922(g) conviction)
- Greer v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 2090 (2021) (plain‑error/Rehaif relief requires showing one would have presented evidence of non‑felon status)
- United States v. Joos, 638 F.3d 581 (8th Cir. 2011) ("knowingly" required for possession of explosive device under §842(i))
- United States v. Young, 753 F.3d 757 (8th Cir. 2014) (distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic evidence for Rule 404(b))
- United States v. McArthur, 850 F.3d 925 (8th Cir. 2017) (sentencing‑package doctrine—vacatur of entire sentence may be appropriate when one conviction is overturned)