United States v. Lee
790 F.3d 12
| 1st Cir. | 2015Background
- Benjamin Lee stalked his estranged wife, Tawny, and her boyfriend Timothy Mann after she moved from Missouri to Maine; he traveled from Missouri to Maine, was stopped nearby, and arrested with firearms and items suggesting planned violence.
- Tawny testified to a long history of controlling, verbal, and physical abuse by Lee (notably a 1979 abduction-like incident and a 2010 cane strike). She and Mann feared Lee based on prior abuse, threatening emails, and the conduct surrounding his trip to Maine.
- Evidence recovered from Lee’s car included loaded firearms, knives, duct tape, rope, camouflage paint, maps and photographs of Tawny’s house; Lee had emailed and called repeatedly and made threats. He did not testify at trial.
- Lee was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(1) (interstate stalking) for conduct placing victims in reasonable fear or causing substantial emotional distress; a jury convicted him of two counts.
- The district court sentenced Lee to 100 months (above the Guidelines range of 51–63 months), applying a two-level pattern-of-activity enhancement and declining a downward departure for medical/mental conditions.
Issues
| Issue | Lee's Argument | Government's Position | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior abuse evidence | Prior abuse irrelevant because statute requires fear from conduct "in the course of, or as a result of," interstate travel; alternatively, unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403 | Prior abuse is relevant to reasonableness of victims' fear and to intent/motive; limiting instruction reduces prejudice | Affirmed. Prior abuse relevant under Walker; 403 balance not abused given limiting instruction. |
| Trial scheduling / truncated proceedings | Court insisted case finish by scheduled date, denying meaningful opportunity to present defense (lost witnesses, pressured not to testify) | Trial schedule was set without objection; defense expressed satisfaction midtrial and identified no specific prejudice | Affirmed. No abuse of discretion; no identified prejudice. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Health problems, benign explanations for items in car, and noncriminal intent (photos for divorce) rendered victims' fear unreasonable and no criminal intent existed | Jury could credit victims and corroborating physical evidence, threats, and Lee’s statements showing intent | Affirmed. A rational jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Sentencing enhancements and variance | Pattern-of-activity enhancement and denial of downward departure for medical conditions were improper; upward variance unreasonable | Recent threatening emails and conduct established a pattern; district court properly weighed §3553(a) factors and victims’ safety concerns justify variance | Affirmed. Enhancement supported; denial of departure and upward variance not an abuse of discretion; sentence reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Walker, 665 F.3d 212 (1st Cir. 2011) (prior threats and violent behavior can be considered in assessing reasonableness of fear under §2261A)
- United States v. Rodríguez, 731 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2013) (standard of review: view facts in light most favorable to jury verdict)
- United States v. Robinson, 433 F.3d 31 (1st Cir. 2005) (framework for identifying pattern-of-activity under guidelines)
- United States v. Romero-Lopez, 695 F.3d 17 (1st Cir. 2012) (continuances: reversal only for unreasonable and arbitrary insistence on expedition)
- United States v. Delgado-Marrero, 744 F.3d 167 (1st Cir. 2014) (prejudice requirement when reviewing denial of continuance)
- United States v. Mehanna, 735 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2013) (Rule 403 reversals are rare; require extraordinarily compelling reasons)