United States v. Trent
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 18364
| 10th Cir. | 2014Background
- Defendant Richard Trent pleaded guilty to a 2007 Oklahoma conspiracy charge cross-referencing other crimes.
- The ACCA enhances punishment if the defendant has three prior serious drug offenses or violent felonies.
- The Oklahoma conspiracy statute is cross-referential and potentially divisible, affecting how prior convictions are analyzed.
- The charged object of the conspiracy was the manufacture of methamphetamine.
- The court applied the modified categorical approach to determine if the prior conspiracy conviction qualifies as a serious drug offense.
- The court affirmed the conviction and sentence after applying divisibility and the modified approach to Trent’s prior record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACCA applicability of prior conspiracy | Trent argues the Oklahoma conspiracy is not a serious drug offense. | Disputes divisibility and application of modified categorical approach. | Divisible; modified categorical approach applies. |
| Sufficiency of evidence | Government evidence supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt. | Credibility issues with witnesses undermine proof. | Sufficient evidence; conviction valid. |
| Admission of prior conviction under Rule 404(b) | Prior felon-in-possession conviction admissible for knowledge/possession. | Risk of unfair prejudice; probative value limited. | No abuse of discretion; admissible but cautioned. |
| Penalty citation in jury instructions | Indictment properly cites penalties; harmless error concern. | Citation could mislead jurors about punishment. | No prejudicial impact; instruction assumedly followed. |
| Investigative-techniques instruction | Instruction undercut defense by suggesting not all methods must be used. | Better investigation could exonerate defendant. | Instruction permissible; did not undermine defense. |
Key Cases Cited
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (U.S. 2013) (modified categorical approach limited to divisible statutes)
- Johnson v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1265 (U.S. 2010) (permissible documents in modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Aguila-Montes de Oca, 655 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2011) (missing-element statutes treated similarly to divisible statutes)
- United States v. Coronado, 759 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2014) (California drug statute divisible for ACCA analysis)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (U.S. 2007) (attempted burglary referenced to determine elements under ACCA)