United States v. Shawanna Reeves
742 F.3d 487
| 11th Cir. | 2014Background
- Three co-defendants—Michael Reeves, Shawanna Reeves (Halcomb-Reeves), and Thornton Moss—were convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine after a nine-day trial.
- DEA/GA investigations used court-ordered wiretaps and video surveillance in 2009–2010 revealing Reeves’s large-scale cocaine distribution network.”
- Recorded calls between Reeves, Halcomb-Reeves, and others, plus corroborating testimony from cooperating co-conspirators, established the conspiracy’s scope.
- Evidence from searches at the Halcomb-Reeves residence yielded substantial quantities of cocaine, gun paraphernalia, and guns linked to the conspiracy.
- Reeves received multiple sentences totaling 360 months; Halcomb-Reeves, 80 months; Moss, 87 months, with supervised release and mandatory assessments; clerical errors in Reeves’s judgment were later corrected on remand.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the convictions and remanded solely to correct clerical errors in Reeves’s written judgment.
- The court addressed sufficiency of the evidence, evidentiary rulings on recordings and co-conspirator statements, a Miranda-right-to-counsel issue, prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments, and the sentencing quantity calculation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy | Reeves and Halcomb-Reeves | Reeves and Halcomb-Reeves | Sufficient evidence supported conspiracy convictions |
| Admission of recorded telephone calls | Halcomb-Reeves asserts improper authentication and bolstering | Government properly authenticated; no improper bolstering | Admission proper; no reversible error |
| Co-conspirator statements as non-hearsay | Halcomb-Reeves contends Rule 801(d)(2)(E) not proven | Statements made in course of conspiracy admissible | Admissible under Rule 801(d)(2)(E) based on evidence of conspiracy |
| Right to counsel remark during interrogation | Halcomb-Reeves asserts Doyle/ Miranda violation | Mistrial denied; harmless error | Comment deemed harmless; no reversal |
| Prosecutorial closing argument misconduct (Moss) | Moss argues statements misstated facts to prejudice | No substantial prejudice; curative instructions given | No reversible error; closing remarks not outcome-determinative |
| Sentencing: drug quantity attribution to Reeves | Quantity >150 kg established | Questionable credibility of Jackson’s figures | District court did not clearly err; quantity over 150 kg supported |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Capers, 708 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2013) (sufficiency review; de novo; standard for Rule 29 challenges)
- Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 (U.S. 1942) (participation in conspiracy may be inferred from circumstantial evidence)
- McNair v. United States, 605 F.3d 1152 (11th Cir. 2010) (participation need not be equal or each stage; knowledge sufficient)
- Toler v. United States, 144 F.3d 1423 (11th Cir. 1998) (single conspiracy can be shown by repeated transactions)
- Dekle v. United States, 165 F.3d 826 (11th Cir. 1999) (large-scale conspiracy with interdependent co-conspirators)