United States v. Ray Bassett
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15103
| 8th Cir. | 2014Background
- Otis McAllister planned a bank robbery to obtain a sentence reduction and enlisted Ray and Willie Bassett.
- Otis and Anthony McAllister misrepresented the operation as an inside job involving a bank employee.
- On November 4, 2011, FBI agents arrested Anthony McAllister, Ray Bassett, and Willie Bassett at Anthony McAllister’s residence; police recovered weapons, clothing, and gear.
- Ray Bassett admitted in post-arrest interview to planning and participating in the robbery, including prior armed-robbery history.
- Ray and Willie Bassett were indicted on multiple counts; Ray was charged with conspiracy, attempted bank robbery, and firearm offenses; Willie with conspiracy and attempted bank robbery; Otis and Anthony with solicitation to commit a crime of violence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy to rob | Bassett contends no meeting of minds with Otis/Anthony to rob Pulaski Bank | Bassett maintains acquittal of Willie defeats conspiracy with him | Conspiracy supported by evidence against Ray, including admissions and phone/email communications |
| Sufficiency of evidence for possession of firearm in furtherance of crime of violence | Conviction rests on conspiracy evidence | Again intertwined with conspiracy; lacking independent proof | Sufficient under conspiracy-supported theory; conviction proper |
| Admissibility of Rule 404(b) evidence (2000 armed bank robbery) | Evidence probative of intent/motive; relevant and admissible | Prejudicial; not sufficiently similar or probative | District court did not abuse its discretion; 404(b) evidence properly admitted with limiting instruction |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wanna, 744 F.3d 584 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard for sufficiency of evidence; deferential review to jury verdict)
- United States v. Hayes, 391 F.3d 958 (8th Cir. 2004) (strictness of review when challenge to evidence)
- United States v. Hoelscher, 764 F.2d 491 (8th Cir. 1985) (elements of conspiracy and proof by circumstantial evidence)
- United States v. Walker, 470 F.3d 1271 (8th Cir. 2006) (Rule 404(b) admissibility for intent; similar acts need not be identical)
- United States v. Lucas, 499 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 2007) (intent evidence admissibility; defendant’s knowledge and intent at issue)
- United States v. Banks, 706 F.3d 901 (8th Cir. 2013) (abuse of discretion standard for 404(b) rulings)