United States v. Scott
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 11463
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Aryan Brotherhood is a violent prison gang; Scott was a prospective member at Leavenworth in 1992 and later headed AB’s business department.
- AB waged a war with the D.C. Blacks; the conflict followed the 1996 Marion prison incident involving an elderly white inmate.
- Scott was alleged to have participated in AB violence, including stabbing Erving Bond in 2000.
- Scott was tried on a RICO conspiracy count alleging participation in AB’s pattern of racketeering, including murder and drug trafficking.
- The jury found Scott conspired to murder Walter Johnson and two unnamed D.C. Black inmates; the PSR set a level-28 base and a total sentence of 220 months; he was in criminal history category VI as a career offender.
- The panel affirmatively reviewed trial conduct issues, including voir dire, cross-examination limits, note-taking prohibition, and admissibility of co-conspirator statements, and rejected multiple challenges to the sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether voir dire limits constitutionally erroneous | Scott; voir dire restricted bias probing | Scott; district court abused discretion | No reversible error; discretion proper |
| Whether cross-examination restrictions violated Confrontation or due process | Scott; prohibitions harmed defense | Scott; limits were permissible | Not reversible; scope appropriate under precedent |
| Whether juror note-taking prohibition violated due process | Scott; length/complexity required notes | Scott; note-taking unnecessary | Within district court's broad discretion; no coercion or prejudice found |
| Whether the court erred in refusing implied mutual combat/imperfect self-defense instructions | Scott; defenses should have been given | No evidence to support those defenses; plain error absent | Plain-error review not triggered; no abuse |
| Whether the district court properly considered co-conspirator statements and other sentencing factors | Scott; improper reliance on acquitted acts; COI issues | Court properly determined conspiracy; offense of violence established | Conviction sustained; sentencing within legal framework |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Brown, 936 F.2d 1042 (9th Cir. 1991) (limits on cross-examination relevance and scope)
- United States v. Giese, 597 F.2d 1170 (9th Cir. 1979) (voir dire and prejudice principles)
- Vargas v. United States, 933 F.2d 701 (9th Cir. 1991) (scope of cross-examination)
- Kennedy v. Los Angeles Police Dept., 901 F.2d 702 (9th Cir. 1990) (court questioning of witnesses and defense rights)
- Shad v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 799 F.2d 525 (9th Cir. 1986) (limits on judicial intervention and need for curative instructions)