United States v. Michael Potter
927 F.3d 446
6th Cir.2019Background
- Michael Potter was arrested in June 2015; after initially refusing to speak, he signed a Miranda waiver and confessed to distributing large quantities of methamphetamine (claimed ten pounds) and later participated in continued distribution through associates.
- Potter purchased multiple distribution-level shipments from a Georgia supplier (Hogan) and coordinated or financed additional purchases via associates (Goodson, Hilliard); transactions spanned 2014–2017.
- The government indicted Potter (and others) for a conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846.
- At a suppression hearing, the magistrate judge found Potter not credible and concluded his references to an attorney were equivocal and did not trigger Edwards protection; the district court adopted that recommendation.
- A jury convicted Potter of the conspiracy; because this was his eighth felony drug conviction, he received a mandatory life sentence under the then‑applicable version of § 841(b)(1)(A)(viii).
- Potter appealed, challenging (1) admissibility of his post‑Miranda statements under Edwards/Davis, (2) evidentiary rulings under Rules 402/403, (3) sufficiency of the evidence for conspiracy, and (4) the Eighth Amendment constitutionality of the mandatory life sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Potter) | Defendant's Argument (Gov't) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Potter invoked his right to counsel so as to trigger Edwards and require suppression of his statements | Potter says he repeatedly asked about and for an attorney during interrogation, so questioning should have stopped | Agents say Potter only mentioned an attorney equivocally or asked whether he needed one; Potter then waived and spoke | Court held Potter’s remarks were equivocal under Davis; Edwards did not apply; statements admissible |
| Whether Potter’s pre‑indictment admissions (earlier actors/time) were relevant and unduly prejudicial (Rules 402/403) | Potter argued statements concerned different actors and earlier time, thus irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial | Gov’t argued statements were relevant to intent, similarity, and timeline; limiting instruction reduced prejudice | Court held statements were relevant, probative outweighed prejudice, and admission did not abuse discretion |
| Whether evidence was insufficient to convict under § 846 | Potter argued the proof showed only buyer/seller transactions, not a conspiracy | Gov’t relied on repeated large purchases, accomplice testimony, and conduct showing tacit agreement and reengagement after arrest | Court held a rational jury could infer an agreement and Potter’s knowing, voluntary joinder; evidence sufficient |
| Whether mandatory life sentence for recidivist drug offender violates Eighth Amendment (extend Miller) | Potter urged extension of Miller to adults who commit nonviolent offenses, arguing life is cruel and unusual | Gov’t relied on Supreme Court precedent applying narrow proportionality, recidivism enhancements, and circuit precedent upholding § 841 life term | Court rejected extension of Miller, found binding precedent and tradition support sentence, and affirmed mandatory life |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (prophylactic warnings and right to counsel during custodial interrogation)
- Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (police must cease interrogation after an unambiguous request for counsel)
- Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (requests for counsel must be unambiguous to trigger Edwards)
- Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (de novo review for the ultimate Fourth Amendment question; analogized for Edwards invocation)
- Shabani v. United States, 513 U.S. 10 (no overt act required to prove a drug conspiracy under § 846)
- Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11 (narrow proportionality principle and upholding severe sentences for recidivists)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (categorical Eighth Amendment rule for juveniles; children are different)
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (upholding severe adult sentence; proportionality analysis)
- United States v. Hill, 30 F.3d 48 (6th Cir. precedent upholding mandatory life under § 841 for recidivists)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (limits on propensity evidence and relevance analysis)