United States v. Dominique Brand
23-4508
4th Cir.Mar 19, 2025Background
- Dominique Devonah Brand was convicted after a bench trial for kidnapping resulting in death, carjacking resulting in death, and use of a firearm during a crime of violence resulting in death.
- Brand was linked to the crimes by DNA evidence found in the victim Elvington's home, on her vehicle, and on a sweatshirt he wore during questioning.
- Surveillance video showed a man matching Brand's description involved in the events leading to Elvington's death.
- The government presented evidence that Brand fired a shotgun in Elvington's home, forced her across state lines, took over her car, and killed her.
- Brand appealed, arguing insufficient evidence supported his convictions for each charge.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed the conviction for clear error (facts) and de novo (law), viewing evidence most favorably to the government.
Issues
| Issue | Brand's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence connecting Brand to crimes | Evidence was insufficient to connect Brand to crimes | DNA and video evidence sufficiently link Brand to offenses | Sufficient evidence supported verdict |
| Kidnapping—Lack of consent | Government failed to prove victim did not consent | Evidence showed victim was restrained against her will | Sufficient evidence of lack of consent |
| Carjacking—Intent to harm | Insufficient evidence of intent to kill/seriously injure | Actions and circumstances show Brand had intent | District court did not clearly err on intent |
| Use of firearm during violent crime | Insufficient because prior convictions unsupported | Other convictions are supported, thus so is this charge | Sufficient evidence supports all convictions |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Landersman, 886 F.3d 393 (4th Cir. 2018) (standards for bench trial appellate review: factual findings clearly erroneous, law de novo)
- United States v. Blake, 571 F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 2009) (setting forth elements for federal carjacking resulting in death)
- United States v. Lentz, 524 F.3d 501 (4th Cir. 2008) (elements for federal kidnapping)
- United States v. Murillo, 826 F.3d 152 (4th Cir. 2016) (kidnapping under § 1201(a) requires unlawful restraint against victim's will)
- United States v. Bailey, 819 F.3d 92 (4th Cir. 2016) (intent required for carjacking: unconditional or conditional intent to kill or injure)
- United States v. Robinson, 855 F.3d 265 (4th Cir. 2017) (carjacking intent must be directed at driver at moment of taking)