United States v. Gerry Burnett
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12549
| D.C. Cir. | 2016Background
- From May 2011–Jan 2012 McDuffie and Thaxton made repeated I‑95 trips to obtain heroin from Jesse (Thaxton’s cousin in New York); McDuffie and Burnett then resold it in D.C.
- Federal investigation used GPS, phone records, texts, rental‑car records, surveillance, and a cooperating witness (McDuffie) who made controlled buys and testified at trial.
- On Jan 21, 2012, after surveillance showed McDuffie and Thaxton briefly in Philadelphia and heading south on I‑95, Maryland State Police stopped a rental car and seized ~62 g heroin; subsequent federal searches of Thaxton’s and Burnett’s homes recovered scales, cash, heroin, marijuana, and paraphernalia.
- Maryland inadvertently destroyed most of the heroin seized from the rental car while state charges were dismissed; the government introduced secondary evidence (reports, photos, testimony) at trial.
- A jury convicted Thaxton, Jesse, and Burnett of conspiracy to distribute ≥100 g heroin (lesser‑included) and convicted Burnett on separate possession counts; district court sentenced Thaxton and Jesse ~11 yrs, Burnett ~12.6 yrs.
- On appeal the D.C. Circuit affirmed convictions and most sentencing rulings but vacated Burnett’s sentence and remanded for resentencing because the court attributed pre‑joining conduct to him.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stop and search of rental car (Fourth Amendment) | Govt: officers had probable cause based on pattern of trips, GPS/phone corroboration, surveillance of pickup in Philadelphia | Thaxton: stop lacked probable cause because this trip was to Philadelphia not NYC and thus inconsistent with prior pattern | Court: probable cause existed under totality of circumstances; stop/search valid |
| Destruction of rental‑car heroin (Due Process) | Govt: destruction was inadvertent by state agency and secondary evidence admissible; no bad faith; evidence not exculpatory | Defendants: destruction violated due process; federal failure to ensure preservation via state custody shows bad faith; evidence potentially exculpatory | Court: defendants failed to show government bad faith or that evidence was potentially exculpatory; admission of secondary evidence proper |
| Search warrant for Burnett’s home (Fourth Amendment / Leon) | Govt: warrant supported by affidavits including controlled buys, GPS, phone calls, observations linking Burnett to distribution | Burnett: affidavit relied on unlawful GPS tracking inside home, so warrant lacked probable cause | Court: even if GPS were erroneous, Leon good‑faith exception applies; affidavit had ample independent indicia of probable cause; evidence admissible |
| Admission of prior guilty pleas (Rule 404(b)/403) | Govt: prior pleas admissible for non‑propensity purposes (intent, knowledge, etc.) | Thaxton & Jesse: prior pleas were propensity evidence; insufficient non‑propensity link and unduly prejudicial | Court: did not decide admissibility question but held any error harmless because the government’s case was overwhelming (corroborated cooperating witness, surveillance, records) |
| Sentencing — drug quantity and attribution | Govt: total conspiracy quantity (995.7 g) properly attributed for Guidelines; Burnett bore his share after he joined | Jesse & Burnett: court double‑counted 130 g and overstated November/December amounts; Burnett: court attributed pre‑joining conduct to him | Court: double‑counting claim harmless (same Guidelines tier). Court rejected quantity challenges. But court found plain error in attributing May–July (pre‑joining) 310 g to Burnett; vacated and remanded for resentencing of Burnett |
Key Cases Cited
- Pennsylvania v. Labron, 518 U.S. 938 (per curiam) (vehicle exception allows warrantless search when probable cause exists)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (establishes totality‑of‑circumstances standard for probable cause)
- Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (probable cause is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good‑faith exception to exclusionary rule for warrant reliance)
- Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (defendant must show bad faith to prevail on due process claim for destroyed evidence)
- United States v. Childress, 58 F.3d 693 (relevant‑conduct rules for drug quantity attribution)
- United States v. Thomas, 989 F.2d 1252 (observations of illegal activity away from residence can support a warrant for the residence)
- United States v. McKie, 951 F.2d 399 (analyzing bad faith and due process for destroyed evidence)