932 F.3d 610
7th Cir.2019Background
- In late 2016 five men were arrested for a string of armed robberies and carjackings in Milwaukee; three pleaded guilty and cooperated (Rollins, Scott, Lindsey); Otis Hunter and Deshawn Evans went to trial and were convicted by a jury.
- Multiple robberies and carjackings were linked by surveillance, identifications by cooperating witnesses, physical evidence (receipts, stocking DNA), and victim identifications; Hunter was found with Foot Locker receipts tied to a December 4 carjacking.
- During voir dire the clerk omitted updated juror information; Juror 7 (Black) was later peremptorily struck by the government after the court restarted jury selection to remedy disclosure errors; defendants raised a Batson challenge.
- The district court limited cross-examination of cooperating witnesses about the specific length of sentencing benefits they received or avoided, permitting only that they received substantial reductions; defendants argued this violated the Confrontation Clause.
- Investigator Strasser testified before being designated as a summary witness; the court limited his testimony to his direct involvement and did not give a curative instruction for his brief early remarks; Hunter complained in a pro se supplemental brief about evidentiary rulings, lack of curative instruction, and sufficiency of evidence.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed: it found no clear error in the Batson ruling, upheld the limitation on sentencing-specific cross-examination under circuit precedent, rejected Hunter’s pro se evidentiary and sufficiency claims, and affirmed convictions and sentences.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Batson challenge to peremptory strike of Juror 7 | Hunter/Evans: government struck Juror 7 because of race; restart allowed prosecutor to manufacture pretexts and cure discriminatory strike | Government: struck juror for race-neutral reasons (extensive adverse contacts with courts); when additional information emerged similar white jurors were also struck; omission of Juror 35 info was clerical | No clear error; district court credited race-neutral explanation and restart remedied disclosure problems, not a Batson violation |
| Limitation on cross-examining cooperating witnesses about precise sentence reductions | Hunter/Evans: Confrontation Clause entitles probing exact sentences avoided to show bias | Government: precise sentencing detail risks revealing defendants’ exposure and prejudicing jury; sufficient to show witnesses received substantial benefit | Affirmed under Seventh Circuit precedent (Trent): limiting precise-sentence inquiry did not violate confrontation rights because defense could still expose bias |
| Admission and scope of investigator Strasser’s testimony and curative instruction | Hunter (pro se): Strasser improperly offered summary/expert comparisons; court should have given curative instruction for pre-objection remarks | Government/District Court: Strasser should have been limited to his involvement; pre-objection remarks were brief and not prejudicial; no curative instruction requested at trial | No plain-error: limiting testimony was proper and lack of curative instruction did not likely affect outcome |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Hobbs Act interstate-commerce element and carjacking mens rea | Hunter (pro se): government failed to prove commerce effect for business robberies and intent to cause serious harm for carjackings | Government: businesses were engaged in interstate commerce (stipulated); evidence (gun use, victim testimony) showed conditional intent to cause serious harm | Evidence sufficient: de minimis commerce effect satisfied; mens rea for carjacking supported by testimony of threats and physical assault |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (prohibits race-based peremptory strikes)
- United States v. Trent, 863 F.3d 699 (7th Cir. 2017) (limiting inquiry into precise sentencing benefits does not violate Confrontation Clause if bias is otherwise exposed)
- United States v. Carter, 111 F.3d 509 (7th Cir. 1997) (standard of review for Batson findings: clear error)
- United States v. Taylor, 636 F.3d 901 (7th Cir. 2011) (district court may err if prosecutor expands justifications on remand)
- Flowers v. Mississippi, 139 S. Ct. 2228 (Supreme Court 2019) (describing highly deferential review of Batson factual findings)
- United States v. Mannie, 509 F.3d 851 (7th Cir. 2007) (fair trial, not perfect trial, standard)