United States v. James Baxter, II
411 U.S. App. D.C. 396
| D.C. Cir. | 2014Background
- From 1995–2002 WTU officers (including Baxter as treasurer, Bullock as president, and Hemphill as bookkeeper) diverted union funds via misuse of WTU AmEx cards, fraudulent checks, and a front company, stealing millions.
- Baxter countersigned checks, signed fraudulent financial reports, wrote checks to himself and to fronts (Expressions Unlimited, Leroy Holmes), and participated in an inflated-dues scheme (deducting $160.09 instead of $16.09) to cover shortfalls. FBI recovered documentary and electronic evidence linking Baxter to the schemes.
- Baxter was indicted on numerous counts (conspiracy, mail/wire fraud, honest-services fraud, embezzlement, false statements, money laundering). After a 12-week trial, Baxter was convicted on all counts and sentenced to 120 months; direct appeal affirmed.
- Baxter filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion raising: (1) Brady claim for non-disclosure of Bullock’s bipolar disorder; (2) Skilling-based challenge to conspiracy conviction because honest-services theory is invalid absent bribes/kickbacks; (3) Adefehinti-based challenge to money-laundering convictions as not distinct from predicate offenses. District court denied relief; Baxter appealed.
- The D.C. Circuit granted certificates of appealability on Skilling and Adefehinti issues but denied one for the Brady claim; it ultimately affirmed the denial of § 2255 relief on all counts.
Issues
| Issue | Baxter's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brady nondisclosure of Bullock’s bipolar disorder | Evidence was favorable and material; would have impeached Bullock and affected verdict | Not material; Baxter fails to show how it would change outcome; transcript was publicly available at sentencing | No COA; Brady claim fails for lack of materiality and no showing of reasonable probability of different result |
| Skilling / honest-services invalidity of conspiracy conviction (general verdict) | Jury may have relied on invalid honest-services theory; conviction therefore constitutionally tainted | Any error was harmless; moreover Baxter defaulted the claim on direct appeal | COA granted as debatable; claim procedurally defaulted; Baxter cannot show actual innocence of money-or-property fraud, so default not excused; claim denied |
| Actual innocence gateway to overcome procedural default (Skilling) | Baxter contends he is actually innocent of honest-services theory, so should pass through to merits | Government argues Baxter must show innocence of all charged alternative theories; evidence supports money/property fraud conviction | Must show it is more likely than not no reasonable juror would convict on charged offense (both theories). Baxter cannot show actual innocence of money/property fraud; gateway denied |
| Adefehinti challenge to money laundering convictions | Money-laundering transaction was not distinct from the predicate criminal transactions; conviction invalid | Government: evidence shows distinct concealment acts and transfers that could constitute laundering; claim may be untimely | COA granted as debatable; §2255 untimely absent tolling; Baxter fails to show equitable tolling or actual innocence of laundering; claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Hemphill v. United States, 514 F.3d 1350 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (direct appeal describing the scheme and affirming convictions)
- Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010) (limits honest-services fraud to bribes and kickbacks; general-verdict harmless-error framework)
- Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998) (procedural default may be excused for cause and prejudice or actual innocence)
- McQuiggin v. Perkins, 133 S. Ct. 1924 (2013) (actual innocence can serve as gateway to overcome procedural bars and statute-of-limitations)
- United States v. Adefehinti, 510 F.3d 319 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (money-laundering requires laundering transactions distinct from those generating proceeds)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution must disclose evidence favorable to defense that is material to guilt or punishment)