United States v. Trey Boykin
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 12793
8th Cir.2015Background
- Boykin was convicted on counts alleging kidnapping under 18 U.S.C. §1201 and conspiracy to distribute marijuana under 21 U.S.C. §§841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(D), 846.
- R.W., a Briar Cliff University student in Sioux City, Iowa, purchased marijuana from Boykin starting with a 1-gram sale for $15.
- In Feb. 2013, Boykin and Gerry Patterson planned to rob R.W. on campus; Patterson carried a handgun during the encounter.
- On Feb. 25, 2013, R.W. was abducted in Boykin’s car at Briar Cliff, robbed of cash and valuables, then released; the gun was displayed and the crime was reported to campus security.
- The government charged a six-count superseding indictment; jury found Boykin guilty on Counts 1 and 2 but not on Counts 3 and 6; the district court denied acquittal on Count 2 and reserved ruling on Counts 2 and 3.
- On appeal, the court affirming kidnapping but reverse conspiracy due to insufficient evidence, remanding for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the kidnapping indictment omitted an essential element | Boykin | Boykin | Indictment survives; sufficient under law |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence of conspiracy to distribute marijuana | Boykin | Boykin | Conspiracy conviction reversed; insufficient evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Hayes v. United States, 296 F.2d 657 (8th Cir.1961) (indictment sufficiency under §1201 despite missing motive language)
- Clinton v. United States, 260 F.2d 825 (5th Cir.1958) (discussion of purpose language in kidnapping statute)
- Smith v. United States, 360 U.S. 1 (1959) ( Supreme Court on motive and essential elements)
- United States v. Healy, 376 U.S. 75 (1964) (motive for kidnapping as potentially essential element)
- United States v. Adams, 83 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir.1996) (buyer-seller relationships in conspiracy context)
- United States v. Martell, 335 F.2d 764 (4th Cir.1964) (statutory purpose of kidnapping not essential element)
- United States v. Gawne, 409 F.2d 1403 (9th Cir.1969) (kidnapping elements—purpose not required)
- United States v. Camp, 541 F.2d 737 (8th Cir.1976) (first-to-appeal challenge to indictment sufficiency allowed)
- United States v. Peeler, 779 F.3d 773 (8th Cir.2015) (buyer-seller relationship and conspiracy inference standard)