United States v. Lorenzo Harris-Thompson, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8288

Harris-Thompson pled guilty to user-in-possession of a firearm and awaited sentencing; he orchestrated a plan to hire a hit on the Mount Vernon police chief to influence sentencing.
Jurors reported perceived contact with Harris-Thompson’s family; the district court conducted an investigation with marshal participation and no record transcript of the interview.
Defense sought mistrial/new trial; the court denied, finding juror concerns alleviated after interviews and admonitions.
Evidence at trial included jailhouse testimony and recorded calls showing Harris-Thompson’s instructions to have the chief killed; Troyer and others testified.
Harris-Thompson challenged jury procedures, evidentiary rulings, and the sufficiency of the evidence; the district court also denied a belated motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
The court ultimately imposed consecutive maximum sentences totaling 840 months; on appeal, convictions, rulings, and sentence were reviewed and affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Juror contact taint and need for mistrial	Harris-Thompson argues ex parte juror contact violated rights.	Court should determine impact and may proceed if fair.	No reversible error; court conducted appropriate inquiry and denied mistrial.
Sufficiency of the evidence	Troyer’s testimony alone supported convictions.	Evidence lacked reliability and weight.	Sufficient evidence supported all three convictions.
Evidentiary rulings	Excluded documents and recordings weakened defense.	Rulings were within the court’s discretion to avoid confusion.	No reversible abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings.
Jury instructions and defense theory	Court rejected theory-of-defense and mistake-of-fact instructions.	Instructions should reflect defendant’s theory.	Instructions properly balanced theory and law; defendant not entitled to preferred wording.
Plea withdrawal denial	Plain error to deny without evidentiary hearing due to alleged innocence/coercion.	Allegations unreliable and contradicted earlier statements.	No abuse; denial without hearing was permissible.

Remmer v. United States, 347 U.S. 227 (U.S. 1954) (due process requires inquiry into jury-taint; standard for juror exposure to outside influence)
United States v. Behler, 14 F.3d 1264 (8th Cir. 1994) (directed ex parte juror inquiry procedures in Remmer framework)
Gagnon v. United States, 470 U.S. 522 (U.S. 1985) (waiver of Rule 43 rights can occur with defense consent in jury proceedings)
United States v. Tucker, 137 F.3d 1016 (8th Cir. 1998) (deference to district court discretion in handling jury-interference issues)
Brown v. United States, 923 F.2d 109 (8th Cir. 1991) (presence at ex parte juror interviews may be waived; not required for fair proceedings)
United States v. Cheyenne, 855 F.2d 566 (8th Cir. 1988) (deference to trial court’s assessment of juror prejudice findings)
Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87 (U.S. 1974) (district court may exclude cumulative or confusing evidence under 403)