United States v. Jay Schmeltz
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25152
| 6th Cir. | 2011Background
- Schmeltz challenges his conviction for falsifying a document under 18 U.S.C. § 1519, arguing the indictment was duplicitous and the jury wasn’t given a specific unanimity instruction.
- Count 6 charged Schmeltz with falsifying a May 30, 2004 Corrections Officer Report by omitting details of his assault on C.B. and Gray’s sleeper hold.
- Count 7 charged a separate falsification based on the May 30 report’s omissions; the jury acquitted on Count 7 and convicted on Count 6.
- The district court instructed that jurors must unanimously agree that at least one way of violating the statute was proved, but need not agree which way.
- Schmeltz argues the omissions constitute multiple false entries, making Count 6 duplicitous and requiring unanimity as to each omission.
- The court held that § 1519 criminalizes the creation of a false document, and Count 6 charged a single offense based on one falsified document.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Count 6 duplicitous requiring unanimity on omissions? | Schmeltz—three omissions create multiple offenses. | Count 6 alleges one falsified document; no multiple offenses. | No error; Count 6 not duplicitous; single offense. |
| Does § 1519 criminalize the creation of a false document rather than separate false statements? | Omissions create multiple false entries within the document. | Statute punishes falsification of a document as a whole. | Statute criminalizes the creation of a false document; one offense. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d 739 (11th Cir. 2008) (elements of § 1519; unanimity substantial but not required for all subfacts)
- Kakos v. United States, 483 F.3d 441 (6th Cir. 2007) (duplicitous indictments when multiple offenses charged in one count)
- Dedman v. United States, 527 F.3d 577 (6th Cir. 2008) (false statements in one count may be duplicitous depending on form)
- Duncan v. United States, 850 F.2d 1104 (6th Cir. 1988) (multi-fact falsification in a single count considered non-duplicitous where appropriate)
- Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813 (1989) (unanimity principle in jury verdicts; elements vs. underlying brute facts)