618 F. App'x 586
11th Cir.2015Background
- Bryant was convicted by jury of presenting false claims under 18 U.S.C. § 287 and sentenced to 27 months.
- Bryant challenged the district court’s excusal of a juror for cause over objection.
- Bryant challenged admission of evidence about a meeting with a tax preparer related to a non-filed business return.
- Bryant moved for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29; the government’s basis for IRS reissuance of a refund was undisclosed.
- Bryant argued the sentence was improperly increased based solely on allocution denying guilt and lack of remorse.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether juror could be excused for cause | Bryant argues the excusal was improper. | Bryant claims no reasonable basis to remove the juror. | District court did not abuse discretion; juror removal affirmed. |
| Admission of 404(b) evidence | Evidence lacked probative value and was prejudicial, not inextricably intertwined. | Bryant invited the error and admissibility was proper under Rule 404(b). | Admission affirmed due to invited error and strategic use. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Rule 29 | Government failed to prove why IRS reissued refund. | Reissuance not required to sustain § 287 charge; evidence sufficed. | No plain error; denial of Rule 29 affirmed. |
| Sentence based on allocution lack of remorse | Sentence increased due to innocence maintained at allocution. | Court may consider lack of remorse under § 3553(a). | Judge properly considered lack of remorse; sentence affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Fajardo, 787 F.2d 1523 (11th Cir. 1986) (discretion to excuse a juror for cause; replacement with alternate)
- United States v. De La Vega, 913 F.2d 861 (11th Cir. 1990) (prejudice standard for juror excusal; factual basis requirement)
- United States v. Silvestri, 409 F.3d 1311 (11th Cir. 2005) (invited error doctrine)
- United States v. Slocum, 708 F.2d 587 (11th Cir. 1983) (elements of false-claim statute; Rule 404(b) context)
- United States v. Vernon, 723 F.3d 1234 (11th Cir. 2013) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in sentencing context)
- United States v. Gall, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for reviewing sentencing decisions)
- United States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d 739 (11th Cir. 2008) (sentencing within Guidelines presumptively reasonable)
- United States v. Stanley, 739 F.3d 633 (11th Cir. 2014) (permissible factors in sentencing; allocution remarks considered)
- United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. 2010) (section 3553(a) factors; abuse of discretion in sentencing)
- United States v. Evans, 478 F.3d 1332 (11th Cir. 2007) (plain-error standard in review)