United States v. Jones
3:19-cr-00065
N.D. Miss.May 7, 2020Background
- Superseding indictment (Dec. 4, 2019) charges Michael Willie and co-defendants with three VICAR counts (18 U.S.C. § 1959): two assaults with a dangerous weapon causing serious bodily injury (Counts 1–2) and a conspiracy to murder (Count 3), arising from alleged membership/role in the "Gangster Disciples."
- The indictment alleges the defendants sat on a "VIP Facility Board" at East Meridian Correctional Facility and that the offenses occurred on or about May 15, 2018 "in the Northern District of Mississippi and elsewhere."
- Willie moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, arguing the charged acts occurred in the Southern District of Mississippi (East Mississippi Correctional Facility) and that there is no evidence he was associated with any gang.
- The Government opposed, asserting the indictment charges federal offenses and alleges aiding/abetting and other conduct continuing in the Northern District.
- The court treated the indictment allegations as true for the pretrial motion, analyzed subject‑matter jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction, and venue, and found the VICAR counts to be continuing offenses with alleged conduct in the Northern District.
- Decision: Judge Debra M. Brown denied Willie’s motion to dismiss on May 7, 2020.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Government) | Defendant's Argument (Willie) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject‑matter jurisdiction | Indictment charges federal crimes under Title 18, so SMJ exists | No federal jurisdiction because charged acts did not occur in this district | SMJ present; indictment charges Title 18 offenses, so federal jurisdiction proper |
| Territorial jurisdiction | Statutes apply where part of offense occurred in U.S.; indictment alleges conduct in the Northern District | Acts occurred exclusively in Southern District (prison), so no territorial jurisdiction here | Territorial jurisdiction proper because allegations show at least part of offenses occurred in the U.S./Northern District |
| Venue | VICAR is a continuing offense; indictment alleges aiding/abetting and continuing conduct in Northern District so venue is proper under § 3237(a) | Venue improper because relevant acts occurred at a facility in Southern District | Venue proper: continuing‑offense framework and aiding/abetting allegations satisfy venue in Northern District |
| Early evidentiary challenge | Indictment allegations control on a pretrial motion to dismiss; sufficiency of proof is for trial | Government cannot prove charged acts occurred in Northern District; dismissal warranted | Court rejects factual/sufficiency attack at this stage and denies dismissal; factual disputes reserved for trial |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Scruggs, 714 F.3d 258 (5th Cir. 2013) (explaining subject‑matter jurisdiction in criminal cases)
- United States v. Romans, 823 F.3d 299 (5th Cir. 2016) (distinguishing territorial jurisdiction and venue issues in criminal prosecutions)
- United States v. Stinson, 647 F.3d 1196 (9th Cir. 2011) (VICAR can be a continuing offense; aiding/abetting allegations sustain venue in a district)
- United States v. Rounds, 749 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2014) (continuing‑offense test and § 3237(a) venue analysis)
- United States v. Luton, 486 F.2d 1021 (5th Cir. 1973) (venue and territorial jurisdiction require some activity in the district)
- United States v. Clark, 728 F.3d 622 (7th Cir. 2013) (pretrial venue dismissal requires accepting indictment allegations as true)
- United States v. Ayesh, 762 F. Supp. 2d 832 (E.D. Va. 2011) (statutory territorial reach and extraterritoriality presumption)
- United States v. Owens, [citation="724 F. App'x 289"] (5th Cir. 2018) (discussing VICAR venue where murder supported inference of racketeering‑aid and state‑wide organizational operation)