United States v. Paul Stewart
700 F. App'x 394
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Jeffrey Beasley (city treasurer, ex officio pension trustee) and Paul Stewart (elected police & fire pension trustee) were tried and convicted for schemes abusing their trustee positions to defraud Detroit pension systems under Kwame Kilpatrick’s administration.
- Stewart convicted of conspiracy to commit honest-services mail and wire fraud; sentenced to 57 months. Beasley convicted of conspiracy (honest services), two Hobbs Act extortion counts, and acceptance of bribes under 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B); sentenced to 132 months.
- Multiple pretrial and trial motions were litigated; defendants raised several issues on appeal including conflict-of-interest counsel, constructive amendment/variance, statute of limitations, sufficiency of evidence for extortion counts, indictment pleading sufficiency as to § 666(b), and alleged prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument.
- The Sixth Circuit reviewed the district court’s extensive opinions and orders, adopted much of the district court’s reasoning, and affirmed the convictions in full.
- Key factual/pleading points: Fifth and Seventh Superseding Indictments were effectively identical; Count alleging bribery referenced acceptance of a vacation from an investor and the indictment’s introductory paragraphs alleged Detroit received federal funds exceeding the § 666(b) threshold.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conflict-free counsel for Stewart | Government/State: counsel ethically represented client; no prejudice | Stewart: counsel had conflicts before/during grand jury testimony depriving him of conflict-free representation | Affirmed district court; conflict claim rejected (no reversible error) |
| Constructive amendment/variance of indictment (Stewart) | Govt: evidence presented matched indictment; any differences immaterial | Stewart: trial evidence and instructions broadened charges beyond grand jury indictment | De novo review; court adopted district court: no constructive amendment or prejudice; claim fails |
| Statute of limitations re: superseding indictments (Stewart) | Govt: superseding indictments relate back to earlier indictment date; charges timely | Stewart: relied on later filing date of Seventh Superseding Indictment to argue time-bar | Held: Fifth and Seventh indictments identical; superseding indictment relates back; limitations defense rejected |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Hobbs Act extortion (Beasley) | Govt: introduced adequate evidence for extortion convictions | Beasley: evidence insufficient for Counts 2 and 4 | Applying Jackson standard, court affirmed district court: evidence was constitutionally sufficient |
| Indictment sufficiency for § 666 bribery count (Beasley) | Govt: introductory allegations establish § 666(b) federal-funds threshold | Beasley: Count 7 failed to recite the § 666(b) requirement; counts must stand alone | Court followed precedent (Hudson): notice was adequate; Count 7 sufficiently pleaded |
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing (Beasley) | Govt: closing remarks permissible; jury instructed that arguments are not evidence | Beasley: prosecution appealed to juror sympathy by invoking pensioners and losses | Court: comments were a small portion of closing; jury instruction cures; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hynes, 467 F.3d 951 (6th Cir. 2006) (standard for reviewing constructive amendment claims)
- United States v. Smith, 197 F.3d 225 (6th Cir. 1999) (superseding indictment relates back to original indictment for statute of limitations if it does not broaden charges)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- United States v. Hudson, 491 F.3d 590 (6th Cir. 2007) (notice and pleading sufficiency where counts may rely on introductory allegations)
- United States v. Calvetti, 836 F.3d 654 (6th Cir. 2016) (application of Jackson sufficiency standard)
- Perry v. Johnson, 532 U.S. 782 (2001) (jurors presumed to follow court instructions)