United States v. Kenneth Schmitt
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20066
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Officers executing a warrant to arrest Schmitt found drugs and an AR-15 in his home; rifle found in a basement during a protective sweep in plain view.
- Search warrant later issued to seize drugs, firearm, and related evidence.
- The district court admitted drug evidence and Schmitt’s state conviction record, despite defense objections.
- Wyatt testified some drugs were his; defense cross-examination challenged ownership, implicating motive for firearm possession.
- The government opened the door to Schmitt’s drug-conviction evidence through Wyatt’s testimony; the court admitted the conviction record.
- Schmitt was convicted on felon-in-possession and related counts; the district court imposed a four-level firearm-enhancement and denied an acceptance of responsibility reduction; Schmitt was sentenced to 110 months’ imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the protective sweep was reasonable to seize the firearm | Schmitt argues the basement search exceeded Buie’s protective-sweep scope | State and federal authorities acted within Buie’s safety-based limits | Yes; sweep reasonable, firearm admissible |
| Whether drug evidence was admissible under Rule 404(b) | Evidence of drugs and dealer activity was relevant to motive | Evidence was improper propensity evidence without legitimate purpose | Admissible for motive; probative value outweighed prejudicial effect |
| Whether admitting Schmitt’s methamphetamine conviction was proper after door opened | Conviction evidence was necessary to rebut Wyatt’s ownership theory | Door opening did not justify admitting the meth conviction; prejudicial | Harmless error; admission did not significantly affect outcome |
| Whether the § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) four-point enhancement was proper | Gun used/possessed in connection with another felony (drug sale for firearm) | No direct connection shown between firearm and another felony | Proper; firearm possessed in connection with selling drugs to obtain the gun |
| Whether the denial of acceptance of responsibility was erroneous | Defendant admitted some conduct; trial justified leniency for acceptance | Late admission and trial demand precluded qualifying for reduction | Not erroneous; no acceptance-reasonable basis for reduction |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (protective sweep doctrine applies to ensure safety; limited search after arrest)
- United States v. Burrows, 48 F.3d 1011 (7th Cir. 1995) (protective sweep duration and scope; safety-based searches on arrest premises)
- United States v. Gorman, 613 F.3d 711 (7th Cir. 2010) (limits on inextricably intertwined doctrine for 404(b))
- United States v. Taylor, 522 F.3d 731 (7th Cir. 2008) (limitations on inextricably intertwined rationale; admissibility under 404(b) for motive)
- United States v. Harris, 587 F.3d 861 (7th Cir. 2009) (framework for admissibility of other-acts evidence to show motive; 404(b) balancing)
- United States v. Lee, 724 F.3d 968 (7th Cir. 2013) (open-door doctrine and relevance when defense challenges evidence)
- United States v. Miller, 673 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2012) (purpose and limits of 404(b) evidence; non-propensity use)
- United States v. Caldwell, 423 F.3d 754 (7th Cir. 2005) (admissibility of other-acts for motive; careful balancing)
- United States v. Lloyd, 71 F.3d 1256 (7th Cir. 1995) (motive evidence; admissibility tied to 404(b) purpose)
- United States v. Lang, 537 F.3d 718 (7th Cir. 2008) (definition of ‘in connection with’ in firearm-offense context)
- United States v. Wyatt, 102 F.3d 247 (7th Cir. 1996) (drug-for-firearm nexus; constructive possession context)
- United States v. Doody, 600 F.3d 752 (7th Cir. 2010) (possession served to further drug trafficking offense; relates to § 924(c) analogy)
- United States v. Loughry, 660 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 2011) (Rule 403 balancing and probative value vs. prejudice in 404(b))
- United States v. Anifowoshe, 307 F.3d 643 (7th Cir. 2002) (admissibility of prior conviction evidence in proper contexts)
- United States v. Meece, 580 F.3d 616 (7th Cir. 2009) (guideline-sentencing review; standard of review for factual findings)