United States v. Jeffery
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 2408
| 4th Cir. | 2011Background
- VBFP at Camp Liberty provided bulk diesel and jet fuel to the Army and contractors in Iraq; access required a Common Access Card and an MFR for entry.
- Defendant Jeffery, a former Navy member, was recruited to Iraq to escort fuel trucks and used forged documents to obtain access and MFRs.
- The group (including Young and DuBois) stole fuel for sale on the Iraqi black market, netting about $30,000 per day; Jeffery was paid as lead escort.
- Emails from 2008 show Jeffery initially suspected but continued participation; by May 2008, he recognized the criminal nature and planned departure yet stayed on for several weeks.
- Jeffery and others were indicted for conspiracy and theft of government property; DuBois pleaded guilty and testified; Young pleaded guilty; Jeffery was convicted at trial and sentenced to 48 months below Guidelines.
- The Fourth Circuit affirmed, holding no error in voir dire, no requirement to prove knowledge of government ownership under § 641, and no abuse in sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voir dire on reasonable doubt and burden of proof | Jeffery argues district court should have asked questions on reasonable doubt | Jeffery contends questions are essential given inflammatory charges | Per curiam, district court sufficiently conducted voir dire; no per se rule required |
| Knowledge that property belonged to the United States under §641 | Jeffery argues knowledge is an element and must be proven | Government ownership is jurisdictional, not an element of §641 | District court properly rejected knowledge-as-element; ownership is jurisdictional only, not a required mens rea element |
| Acceptance of responsibility reduction after trial | Jeffery seeks two-level reduction despite going to trial | Reduction may be appropriate in rare cases even when trial used to test law | District court did not err in denying acceptance-of-responsibility reduction |
| Disparities with coconspirator DuBois under sentencing | Disparity is unwarranted given DuBois’s cooperation | Disparities arise from differences in cooperation and plea status; not unlawful | Court reasonably weighed §3553 factors; no unwarranted disparity warranting re-sentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Lancaster, 96 F.3d 734 (4th Cir.1996) (voir dire deference to district court; impartiality sufficiency)
- Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U.S. 182 (1981) (voir dire and bias assessment; limited appellate review)
- Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (1992) (capital case voir dire requirements)
- Feola v. United States, 420 U.S. 671 (1975) (knowledge of jurisdictional facts not required as element)
- Yermian v. United States, 468 U.S. 63 (1984) (jurisdictional facts not required as element)
- United States v. Bauer, 713 F.2d 71 (4th Cir.1983) (knowledge that property belonged to government not element of §641)
- Speir v. United States, 564 F.2d 934 (10th Cir.1977) (§641 knowledge not required as element; jurisdictional basis)
- Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1886 (2009) (scienter and jurisdictional facts; Flores-Figueroa distinguished)
- X-Citement Video, Inc., 513 U.S. 64 (1994) (statutory mens rea; distinguishes jurisdictional facts)
- United States v. Rehak, 589 F.3d 965 (8th Cir.2009) (Flores-Figueroa not overrule §641 jurisprudence)