United States v. Michael Heath Thetford
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19964
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Thetford, a Alabama resident, impersonated a federal agent to threaten the Winsletts in South Dakota to steal their property.
- He travelled from Alabama to South Dakota, identified as Agent Russ, displayed a handgun, and used fraudulent FBI/military credentials.
- He attempted to coerce the Winsletts to accompany him for statements and a polygraph, then transported them toward Iowa with the gun present.
- Investigators later traced the pistol to Thetford and uncovered fraudulent credentials and related schemes using the Winsletts’ identities.
- Thetford pled guilty in Alabama to related offenses (child pornography, firearm possession, wire fraud); plea agreements and hearings were admitted in SD proceedings, with some redactions for child pornography.
- A superseding SD indictment charged Thetford with felon in possession, impersonating a federal officer, interstate stalking, and witness tampering; he was convicted on all counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interstate-commerce mens rea for 922(g)(1) | Thetford argues knowledge of interstate travel is required. | Thetford asserts the government must prove he knew the firearm had moved in interstate commerce. | Correct instruction: no knowledge requirement for interstate element. |
| Admissibility of Alabama plea agreements | Thetford contends pleas are improper propensity evidence under Rule 404. | The government contends pleas are admissible as opposing-party statements and relevant to South Dakota acts. | Admission upheld as admissible opposing-party statements and not barred by Rule 410 or Rule 404(b). |
| Harmlessness of other evidentiary rulings | Thetford argues certain evidence (sister letter, confederate testimony, badge testimony, boat-sale testimony) was prejudicial. | The government contends the evidence was either corroborative or cumulative. | Any error was harmless in light of overwhelming, corroborating evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- U.S. v. Garcia-Hernandez, undefined (undefined) (cited for rejection of knowledge mens rea on interstate element (Eighth Circuit))
- U.S. v. Bruguier, 735 F.3d 754 (8th Cir. 2013) (en banc discussion on applying 'knowingly' to § 924(a)(2) and related interpretations)
- U.S. v. Ortega, 750 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir. 2014) (standards for reviewing evidentiary rulings)
- U.S. v. Williams, 104 F.3d 213 (8th Cir. 1997) (principles on party-opponent statements (Rule 801(d)(2)))
- U.S. v. LaDue, 561 F.3d 855 (8th Cir. 2009) (contextual relevance of acts intertwined with charged crime)
- U.S. v. Peneaux, 432 F.3d 882 (8th Cir. 2005) (harmless-error standard for evidentiary claims)
- U.S. v. Melecio-Rodriguez, 231 F.3d 1091 (8th Cir. 2000) (evidence may be harmless when corroborated or cumulative)
- U.S. v. Cornelison, 717 F.3d 623 (8th Cir. 2013) (review of jury instructions for abuse of discretion and legal standards)