116 F.4th 1
1st Cir.2024Background
- Corey Donovan was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), after a search at his New Hampshire residence uncovered a shotgun (later found stolen), ammunition, a gun cleaning kit, other weapons, and two oil filters modified as alleged firearm silencers.
- Donovan's girlfriend, Kelley Finnigan, claimed ownership of the seized shotgun after the search but invoked her Fifth Amendment privilege when subpoenaed to testify at trial, citing self-incrimination concerns.
- Before trial, Donovan moved for immunity for Finnigan's testimony (denied) and requested various limiting instructions regarding evidence of other weapons and related items, which he did not renew or object to during trial.
- At sentencing, the district court found that the two modified oil filters qualified as firearm silencers, warranting a sentencing enhancement for possession of three firearms under the Guidelines.
- Donovan appealed his conviction and sentence, raising issues regarding Finnigan's blanket Fifth Amendment invocation, the absence of limiting instructions, and the sentencing enhancement based on the oil filters.
Issues
| Issue | Donovan's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Finnigan could invoke a blanket Fifth | Court failed to probe whether real risk of self-incrimination existed | Court's colloquy was sufficient; defense did not object | District court did not err; reasonable risk of self-incrimination supported privilege |
| Amendment privilege | |||
| Limiting instructions for prejudicial evidence | Court erred by not giving requested or contemporaneous limiting instructions | Issue waived by defense failure to timely object during trial | Argument waived; could not be raised on appeal |
| Sentencing enhancement for modified oil filters | Insufficient evidence that filters were "silencers" under the law | Sufficient expert testimony and physical evidence supported finding | District court not in error; evidence supported enhancement |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ramos, 763 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2014) (appellate review standard for rulings on Fifth Amendment privilege)
- United States v. Acevedo-Hernández, 898 F.3d 150 (1st Cir. 2018) (when court's determination of proper invocation of privilege may be reversed)
- United States v. Cascella, 943 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2019) (blanket assertions of privilege allowed where no relevant, non-privileged testimony exists)
- United States v. Williams, 717 F.3d 35 (1st Cir. 2013) (plain error review for unpreserved jury instruction objections)
- United States v. Padilla-Galarza, 990 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2021) (waiver by failure to renew instruction objections at trial)
- United States v. Ramos-Paulino, 488 F.3d 459 (1st Cir. 2007) (review standards for factual and legal sentencing findings)