United States v. Gloria Taylor, 692 F. App'x 114

Gloria Patricia Taylor was arrested after officers executed a search warrant at her home and vehicles and recovered 286 pounds (about 130 kg) of marijuana from a U-Haul; she was convicted of two counts of using a communications device to facilitate narcotics trafficking and possession with intent to distribute 100+ kg of marijuana, and sentenced to 144 months.
After the seizure, an officer told Taylor she and her son could be arrested; Taylor then wrote a statement taking responsibility for the seized drugs; she was arrested, her son was not.
Taylor moved to suppress her written statement, arguing it was coerced because she was threatened with her son’s arrest; the district court denied suppression after an evidentiary hearing.
During jury deliberations a summary chart (not admitted into evidence) was inadvertently shown to jurors; the district court instructed jurors to disregard and erase any notes and reminded them the chart was not evidence.
At sentencing the court calculated drug weight well above the jury’s finding by including pre-conspiracy shipments as relevant conduct and applied a 2-level obstruction enhancement for false testimony; Taylor challenged both the quantity calculation and the enhancement and also contested the forfeiture calculation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Suppression: Was Taylor’s written statement coerced?	Officer’s threat to arrest her son coerced her into falsely confessing.	Officer truthfully advised probable cause existed to arrest the son; statement was voluntary under totality of circumstances.	Denial of suppression affirmed; truthful statement about possible arrest was not unduly coercive.
Jury impartiality: Did inadvertent display of an unadmitted chart prejudice the jury?	Presentation of the chart during deliberations violated the right to an impartial jury.	Chart had been shown in open court; no identifiable prejudice; court remedied by instruction to disregard.	No reversible error; district court’s curative instruction was appropriate.
Sentencing drug-quantity: May court find drug weight beyond jury’s verdict for Guidelines?	Court’s weight finding (≈4945 kg) exceeded jury finding and violated Apprendi/Alleyne.	District court may find relevant conduct and drug weight for sentencing so long as it does not increase statutory maximum.	No Apprendi/Alleyne violation; court permissibly found relevant conduct and approximated weight.
Obstruction enhancement: Was 2-level enhancement for false testimony appropriate?	Taylor’s suppression-hearing testimony was truthful.	District court discredited Taylor and found willful falsehoods about coercion.	Enhancement affirmed; appellate court defers to district court credibility findings.

United States v. Holmes, 670 F.3d 586 (4th Cir.) (voluntariness standard and totality of circumstances)
United States v. Umana, 750 F.3d 320 (4th Cir.) (factors for voluntariness inquiry)
United States v. Braxton, 112 F.3d 777 (4th Cir.) (truthful statements by officers not coercive)
United States v. Allen, 631 F.3d 164 (4th Cir.) (probable cause and voluntariness context)
United States v. Lentz, 383 F.3d 191 (4th Cir.) (prejudice presumed when improper evidence reaches jury)
United States v. Young, 609 F.3d 348 (4th Cir.) (district court’s authority to find sentencing facts beyond jury’s verdict)
United States v. Agyekum, 846 F.3d 744 (4th Cir.) (relevant conduct at sentencing)
United States v. White, 810 F.3d 212 (4th Cir.) (elements for obstruction enhancement)