United States v. Michael Scott
732 F.3d 910
8th Cir.2013Background
- Seven-count indictment alleging three bank robberies with firearms, a felon-in-possession, and related charges; convictions on counts 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 and acquittal on counts 3 and 4; district court imposed two life sentences for counts 2 and 6 and 115-month terms on counts 1, 5, and 7; court found upward variance justified by Scott’s criminal history and public safety needs.
- Robberies followed a common script: masked armed robbers, vault access, getaway in a stolen vehicle, and similar MO across the 2008 Bank Midwest, 2009 Valley View Bank, and 2010 Commerce Bank robberies.
- Evidence tied Scott to the crimes: Jaguar shown in surveillance; Scott’s DNA on a mask; a/video of him retrieving his Jaguar; a surveillance-driven license plate match; eyewitness identifications.
- During the suppression motion, Starnes—Scott’s former partner and Jaguar’s driver—consented to a Jaguar search after officers secured the apartment; district court found common authority and voluntary consent.
- On appeal, Scott challenged (i) Rule 8(a) joinder/Rule 14 severance, (ii) suppression ruling on consent and common authority, and (iii) life sentences; the panel affirmed severance, suppression, and the sentences as procedurally sound and substantively reasonable.
- Dissent argues the sentence is excessive and would reverse for a 39-year term, highlighting age and proportionality concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Severance of charges permitted by Rule 8(a)? | Scott argues misjoinder prejudiced defense. | Scott contends severance would avoid prejudice. | Joinder proper; no severe prejudice shown. |
| Validity of Jaguar search under Fourth Amendment | Starnes lacked common authority to consent. | Starnes had common authority; consent voluntary. | Common authority and voluntary consent could justify search. |
| Reasonableness of life sentences under 3553(a) | Sentence excessive given age and 39-year minimum. | District court properly weighed factors; life sentences reasonable. | Sentence substantively reasonable; affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Tyndall, 263 F.3d 848 (8th Cir.2001) (joinder/severance framework; Rule 8(a) discussion)
- United States v. Lindsey, 782 F.2d 116 (8th Cir.1986) (short time between offenses supports joinder)
- United States v. Rodgers, 732 F.2d 625 (8th Cir.1984) (timeframe for relatively short period supports joinder)
- United States v. Steele, 550 F.3d 693 (8th Cir.2008) (standard for reviewing severance with prejudice)
- United States v. Quintero, 648 F.3d 660 (8th Cir.2011) (standard for evaluating voluntariness of consent)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (S. Ct. 2007) (procedural/ substantive review of sentencing; defer to district court)
- United States v. Stults, 575 F.3d 834 (8th Cir.2009) (individualized consideration of §3553(a) factors)
- United States v. James, 353 F.3d 606 (8th Cir.2003) (common authority concept in Fourth Amendment)
- United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974) (common authority concept in consent)