United States v. Thomas
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3365
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- Thomas was charged with four Hobbs Act robberies and one firearm offense; counts 1–4 involve different dates and locations in Albuquerque, NM.
- Count 1 occurred May 1, 2010 at a McDonald’s; Counts 2–3 occurred August 10 and August 17, 2013 at a Family Dollar; Count 4 occurred October 19, 2013 at a Check ’n Go.
- Indictment alleged force or threat of force to obtain money; Count 5 alleged using a firearm during Count 4 robbery.
- Thomas moved to sever Count 1 from the other counts; district court denied severance, finding proper joinder.
- Trial proceeded March 30, 2015; jury convicted Counts 1–4, but could not reach a verdict on Count 5; Thomas was sentenced to 108 months plus 3 years of supervised release.
- Evidence included palm-print link to the first robbery and eyewitness testimony for other robberies; court gave limiting instructions on independence of counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for Count 1 | Thomas argues the force was not violent as required. | Government contends Johnson governs and aggressive push suffices. | Sufficient evidence of violent force under Johnson |
| In-court identification due process | Identification was unduly suggestive due to defense table and delay. | Perry/Whatley allow in-court identifications without pretrial reliability ruling. | No due process violation; identification admissible; jury weighs credibility |
| Denial of severance of Count 1 | Joinder prejudices defense by combining dissimilar acts. | Joinder proper; severance would not be warranted; evidence not prejudicial | No abuse of discretion; severance denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010) (violent force requires ability to cause physical pain or injury)
- Perry v. New Hampshire, 565 U.S. 228 (2012) (no prescreening for reliability required for eyewitness identifications)
- Whatley, 719 F.3d 1206 (11th Cir. 2013) (external Perry reasoning applies to in-court identifications)
- Romo-Villalobos, 674 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir. 2012) (nonphysical force sufficient under Johnson in robbery context)
- Hutchinson, 573 F.3d 1011 (10th Cir. 2009) (preference for evaluating prejudice in severance rulings)
- Ford, 613 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 2010) (res gestae/intrinsic evidence admissibility guidance)