United States v. Clifton Patterson
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 14591
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Patterson convicted of aiding and abetting use of a shotgun during a crime of violence and possession of a firearm by a felon; prior bank robbery guilty plea; shotgun belonged to Collins who testified Patterson aided and abetted; BB gun not a firearm; district court allowed closing argument and curative instruction; jury acquitted on the gun-use count but convicted on aiding and abetting and possession charges; life sentence imposed under 18 U.S.C. § 3559(c)(1).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutor's closing arguments improper burden-shifting | Patterson argues burden shift to prove innocence. | Patterson contends remarks improperly urged innocence by lack of evidence. | No reversible error; curative instructions cured prejudice. |
| Effect of prosecutorial comments on absence of evidence | Absent evidence of innocence improperly highlighted. | Defense burden to prove innocence was misrepresented. | Curative instructions and instructions on presumption cured any prejudice. |
| Plain error from rebuttal attacking defense counsel | Prosecutor questioned credibility of defense counsel; plain error. | Context shows critique of credibility, not personal attack. | No plain error; not sufficient to overturn. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Coutentos, 651 F.3d 809 (8th Cir. 2011) (closing-argument discretion abuse standard; cumulative improprieties considered)
- United States v. Swift, 623 F.3d 618 (8th Cir. 2010) (consideration of cumulative improper comments and curative actions)
- United States v. Sandstrom, 594 F.3d 634 (8th Cir. 2010) (prohibition on commenting on defendant's silence or failure to testify)
- United States v. Gardner, 396 F.3d 987 (8th Cir. 2005) (no improper inference from defendant's silence where instructions guard against it)
- United States v. Burns, 432 F.3d 856 (8th Cir. 2005) (prosecutor may not suggest defendant bears burden to produce evidence)
- United States v. Chase, 451 F.3d 474 (8th Cir. 2006) (curative instruction sufficient to negate prejudice from improper comments)
- United States v. Jewell, 614 F.3d 911 (8th Cir. 2010) (no plain error where prosecutor comments on defense theory but not fabricating testimony)
- United States v. Lomeli, 596 F.3d 496 (8th Cir. 2010) (plain-error framework applies; three elements)