United States v. Dominick Johnson
702 F. App'x 349
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Dominick Johnson and half-brother Nathan Benson planned and executed multiple bank robberies in Michigan (three successful, three aborted) in 2014–2015; Benson pled guilty and testified against Johnson.
- Evidence at trial included cell-phone location records linking Johnson to robbery sites, eyewitness and co-conspirator testimony, a GPS-tracked vehicle trip, and Johnson’s DNA on a cheeseburger dropped after one escape; FBI intercepted recruitment efforts and tracked Johnson’s phone leading to a traffic stop and arrest on Feb. 27, 2015.
- Johnson was interviewed in custody on Mar. 31, 2015; he initially asked for an attorney but signed a Miranda waiver and gave statements later used at trial.
- Indictment: conspiracy to commit bank robbery; multiple counts of aiding and abetting armed bank robbery (including forced accompaniment); and three counts of brandishing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). He was convicted on all counts and sentenced to 872 months’ imprisonment.
- District court denied motions to suppress (traffic-stop evidence and post-arrest statements); Johnson appealed contending Fourth and Fifth Amendment violations, insufficient evidence and erroneous jury instructions on § 924(c), and that his sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable (including Eighth Amendment challenge).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of Feb. 27 traffic stop (Fourth Amendment) | Govt: collective knowledge, cell‑tracking, informant tip and surveillance gave reasonable suspicion | Johnson: officers admitted they lacked reasonable suspicion (waited for traffic violation) so stop was impermissible | Stop lawful under collective‑knowledge doctrine; reasonable suspicion existed |
| Admissibility of Mar. 31 statements (Miranda/Edwards) | Govt: after invoking counsel Johnson reinitiated contact by signing waiver and voluntarily spoke | Johnson: he invoked right to counsel and questioning continued in violation of Miranda/Edwards | No violation—Johnson voluntarily reinitiated and knowingly waived counsel; statements admissible |
| Sufficiency and jury instruction on § 924(c) brandishing (aiding & abetting/advance knowledge) | Govt: proof Johnson aided and abetted robberies and had advance knowledge that confederate would be armed; liability under Rosemond | Johnson: insufficient proof of advance knowledge that Benson would brandish (not merely possess) and instructions failed to require intent specific to brandishing | Convictions upheld: Rosemond requires knowledge that confederate would be armed (not advance knowledge of brandishing specifically); instructions adequate and not plain error |
| Sentence challenges (procedural, grouping, stacking, Eighth Amendment) | Govt: Guidelines and statutory mandatory minima properly applied; stacking under Deal controlling; sentence not cruel or unusual | Johnson: judge speculated about future congressional changes, failed to consider co‑defendant disparity, misgrouped counts, wrongly stacked § 924(c) penalties, and sentence disproportionate | Sentence affirmed: no procedural error or abuse of discretion; grouping and stacking decisions consistent with law (Deal); Eighth Amendment arguments foreclosed by precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (stop-and-frisk constitutional standard)
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda warnings and custody interrogation rule)
- Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (post-invocation rule: no further interrogation without counsel unless suspect initiates)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (totality-of-circumstances and officer inferences for reasonable suspicion)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- Rosemond v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1240 (aider/abetter intent for § 924(c): knowledge that confederate will be armed suffices)
- Deal v. United States, 508 U.S. 129 (interpretation of "second or subsequent" for § 924(c) stacking)
- United States v. Franklin, 415 F.3d 537 (6th Cir.) (aiding-and-abetting liability for firearm brandishing)