United States v. Jeffery L. Dickerson
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1530
7th Cir.2013Background
- Dickerson traded five guns for crack with Vankuiken in Aug 2010; exchanged firearms later recovered by police.
- Police found three machineguns and two handguns at storage unit, and a revolver at a separate apartment.
- Vankuiken cooperated and helped arrange a controlled crack purchase; subsequent searches yielded drugs and guns.
- Superseding Indictment charged three offenses; Count 2 split into two ‘in furtherance’ subcharges tied to Aug 2010 activity.
- Jury convicted on all counts; sentence included the 360-month minimum on Count 2; total sentence 511 months.
- Dickerson challenged the § 924(c) conviction on three grounds: jury instruction, merger, and indictment-vs-evidence variance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the third jury instruction correctly stated the law | Dickerson argues ¶ 3 misstates law and risks Sandstrom error | Government argues Doody controls; instruction accurately reflects law | Affirmed the instruction as legally accurate and non-prejudicial |
| Merger of § 924(c) with drug-trafficking conviction | Dickerson says merger bars dual punishment | Government: § 924(c) punishs a separate harm; merger not applicable | Affirmed; merger not required under statute and precedent |
| Variance between indictment date (Aug 2010) and trial evidence date (Sept 24, 2010) | Dickerson contends variance prejudices him | Government: date is not essential; evidence supports charge | Harmless variance; the evidence supports conviction and indictment date variances are permissible |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Doody, 600 F.3d 753 (7th Cir. 2010) (guns-for-drugs possession in furtherance valid under § 924(c))
- United States v. Gardner, 602 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 2010) (possession in furtherance framework followed by circuit courts)
- United States v. O’Brien, 130 S. Ct. 2169 (2010) (1998 possession prong amendment context cited by court)
- United States v. Leibowitz, 857 F.2d 373 (7th Cir. 1988) (variance doctrine; 'on or about' sufficiency rule)
- United States v. Krilich, 159 F.3d 1020 (7th Cir. 1998) (variance due to date difference treated as harmless)