United States v. Kevin Seigler
990 F.3d 331
| 4th Cir. | 2021Background
- FBI wiretapped Las Vegas dealer Stephen Cino; recordings captured calls between Cino and Kevin Seigler discussing a sale described as a “deuce.”
- On March 9, 2016, surveillance followed Cino from a meeting at The Lodge to 5708 Calanas Ave.; Cino left with a white plastic bag later found to contain ~2 pounds of methamphetamine.
- Police executed a search warrant at Seigler’s residence (5708 Calanas Ave.), seized large sums of cash, packaging materials, pills, a digital scale, and a Verizon bill linking the tapped number to Seigler; no meth was found in the house.
- A multi-defendant indictment charged a single, multi-object conspiracy: (1) drug distribution (meth, oxycodone, buprenorphine) and (2) using a communication facility to facilitate a controlled-substance felony. Seigler was tried alone on the conspiracy count; a cooperator described the Virginia distribution network but had not met Seigler.
- Seigler failed to appear at a scheduled Virginia trial date and fled when marshals later approached his home; he pleaded guilty to failure to appear but went to trial on the conspiracy charge. The jury convicted him, found the conspiracy involved methamphetamine (≥500 g), and credited both alleged objects; he was sentenced to a total of 286 months.
- On appeal Seigler raised: (1) insufficiency of evidence for the distribution-object conspiracy, (2) special-verdict-form wording, (3) denial of a Franks hearing challenging the wiretap affidavit, (4) drug-weight findings at sentencing, and (5) a §3C1.1 obstruction enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Seigler's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for distribution-object conspiracy | Single buy (2 lbs) and equivocal recordings insufficient to prove Seigler knowingly joined a conspiracy | Large-quantity sale, recorded coded calls, and flight/failure-to-appear permit inference of participation | Affirmed — substantial evidence (sale + recordings + flight) supported conviction |
| Special-verdict form wording ("and/or"; omission of "felony") | Form created unanimity confusion and could allow conviction based on misdemeanor communications offense | Verdict form read with instructions unambiguously required unanimous finding of at least one object; jury checked both objects | Affirmed — no plain error; instructions and form as a whole showed unanimity |
| Franks hearing re: wiretap affidavit (claims of false statement about Hispanic communities/physical surveillance) | Affidavit knowingly/recklessly mischaracterized surveillance limitations, requiring hearing and suppression | Challenged language was a limited, nonmaterial passage in a lengthy affidavit; no substantial preliminary showing of falsity or recklessness | Affirmed — no Franks hearing required; Seigler failed to make the requisite preliminary showing |
| Sentencing: drug-weight attribution and §3C1.1 obstruction enhancement | District court erred in attributing 4–8 lbs (beyond the undisputed 2 lbs) and wrongly applied obstruction enhancement when he was separately convicted for failure to appear | DEA agent relayed Cino’s proffer (credibly found reliable) to support additional weight; obstruction enhancement applies to conspiracy offense calculation | Affirmed — district court permissibly credited hearsay proffer for weight; §3C1.1 enhancement proper for conspiracy calculation (plain-error review failed) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849 (4th Cir. 1996) (standards for proving membership in drug conspiracy and that a slight connection can suffice)
- United States v. Mills, 995 F.2d 480 (4th Cir. 1993) (a single buy-sell of a substantial quantity can support inference of conspiracy)
- United States v. Townsend, 924 F.2d 1385 (7th Cir. 1991) (contrasting view: buyer-seller transaction alone insufficient to prove conspiracy)
- United States v. Yearwood, 518 F.3d 220 (4th Cir. 2008) (small multi-ounce transactions can support inference of redistribution, not personal use)
- Olano v. United States, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error review framework for unpreserved trial errors)
- Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373 (1999) (verdict forms viewed with jury instructions to resolve possible ambiguity)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (standard for entitlement to evidentiary hearing when alleging false statements in warrant affidavits)
- United States v. Crawford, 734 F.3d 339 (4th Cir. 2013) (hearsay can support sentencing drug-quantity findings if sufficiently reliable)
- United States v. Foutz, 540 F.2d 733 (4th Cir. 1976) (flight evidence is an inherently weak indicator of consciousness of guilt and must be used cautiously)
- United States v. Ath, 951 F.3d 179 (4th Cir. 2020) (discussing consciousness-of-guilt evidence in sentencing/trial contexts)