United States v. Deangelo McLaurin
764 F.3d 372
| 4th Cir. | 2014Background
- McLaurin and Lowery were arrested in a reverse-sting “stash-house” home-invasion investigation in which undercover officers posed as disgruntled drug couriers; the purported stash house and drugs were fictitious.
- Before the sting, McLaurin sold two firearms (a .38 revolver and a sawed-off shotgun) to an undercover officer; Lowery had possessed a distinctive semi-automatic pistol months earlier. Both later met with undercover agents to plan the robbery. Recorded meetings and messages showed planning and statements about weapons and violence.
- Both defendants were charged with three conspiracy counts (Hobbs Act conspiracy, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 5+ kg of cocaine, and conspiracy to use/carry firearms in furtherance of a crime) and felon-in-possession counts (McLaurin: two firearms sales; Lowery: earlier possession). The court severed Lowery’s felon-in-possession count pretrial but not McLaurin’s.
- At trial both raised entrapment defenses; the jury rejected entrapment and convicted both on the conspiracy counts, and McLaurin on both felon-in-possession counts. Sentences: McLaurin 151 months, Lowery 168 months. Appeals followed.
- Issues on appeal included the propriety of a supplemental jury instruction on "inducement" (entrapment), admission of Rule 404(b) prior-bad-act evidence (for predisposition), joinder/severance of counts under Rules 8 and 14, and McLaurin’s sentencing-calculation error (juvenile convictions).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supplemental entrapment instruction defining "inducement" | Gov't: instruction clarifies inducement and is consistent with circuit law | Defs: language requiring "overreaching" improperly shifts focus away from predisposition | Court: Affirmed — supplemental instruction consistent with law and did not remove predisposition element |
| Admission of Lowery's July 2010 gun-possession evidence (Rule 404(b)) | Gov't: evidence probative of predisposition and ability to bring weapons; Lowery opened door by challenging that he actually possessed a gun | Lowery: prior possession too remote/irrelevant | Court: Affirmed — evidence relevant to predisposition, reliable, necessary, not unfairly prejudicial; Lowery opened the door via cross-exam |
| Admission of McLaurin's 2003 robbery conviction (Rule 404(b)) | Gov't: cross-examination created misimpression that no proof existed, opening the door to prior conviction to rebut that impression | McLaurin: questioning limited to robberies of drug dealers and did not open broader door | Court: Affirmed — district court reasonably concluded cross-examination opened the door and admission was within discretion |
| Joinder of McLaurin's felon-in-possession counts with conspiracy counts (Rules 8 and 14) | Gov't: counts logically related; firearm sales helped show predisposition and trust in confidential informant; evidence would be admissible under Rule 404(b) in separate trial | McLaurin: misjoinder prejudiced him because felon-in-possession evidence would be inadmissible separately; severance required | Court: Affirmed — joinder proper (logical relationship) and, in any event, harmless because the felon-in-possession evidence would have been admissible under Rule 404(b) to rebut entrapment; Rule 14 relief not warranted |
| Sentencing calculation (criminal history points for juvenile robberies) | McLaurin: PSR incorrectly assigned points for two 2003 robberies committed at age 16, increasing Guidelines range; plain error review | Government: conceded error but argued no reversible prejudice? | Court: Vacated McLaurin's sentence and remanded — error was plain, affected substantial rights (likely would have yielded lower sentence), and warranted correction to preserve fairness |
Key Cases Cited
- Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58 (describes entrapment as government inducement plus lack of predisposition)
- United States v. Daniel, 3 F.3d 775 (4th Cir.) ("inducement" is term of art involving governmental overreaching)
- United States v. Queen, 132 F.3d 991 (4th Cir.) (Rule 404(b) admissibility framework)
- United States v. Cardwell, 433 F.3d 378 (4th Cir.) (temporal/ investigatory links alone do not establish logical relationship for joinder)
- United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438 (harmlessness analysis for misjoinder; evidence admissible under Rule 404(b) can render joinder harmless)
- United States v. Hawkins, 589 F.3d 694 (4th Cir.) (limits on joinder; mere firearms connection insufficient to tie offenses)
- United States v. Lewis, 641 F.3d 773 (7th Cir.) (admission of prior felon-in-possession and related convictions in home-invasion entrapment context)