United States v. Tyrone Jordan
851 F.3d 393
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Tyrone Eugene Jordan, convicted for money laundering and alien smuggling, filed ~40 documents from prison claiming wrongful conviction and demanding large sums from the trial prosecutor and judge.
- He filed three challenged documents: a U.C.C. Financing Statement with the Texas Secretary of State and two "Affidavit of Obligation Commercial Lien" filings in Harris County naming the prosecutor and judge as debtors.
- A federal district court declared those three documents null and void; Jordan was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 1521 for filing false liens/encumbrances and convicted by a jury on all three counts.
- During jury deliberations the jury asked whether a Harris County filing affects property in Corpus Christi; the district court responded that all evidence was before the jury and directed them to continue; Jordan later objected to that response.
- At sentencing the PSR applied a 6-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2A6.1(b)(1) for conduct evidencing intent to carry out a threat; the district court applied the enhancement and sentenced Jordan to 120 months per count (concurrent).
Issues
| Issue | Jordan's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence under 18 U.S.C. § 1521 (were the filings "false liens or encumbrances") | Filings do not constitute liens/encumbrances; security interest in non-existent contract is not punishable attempt | § 1521 criminalizes filing or attempting to file false liens; validity or commercial effect of filing is immaterial | Conviction affirmed: a rational jury could find the filings were false liens/attempts; statute targets document type and its harm, not commercial success |
| Jury note about geographic effect of Harris County filing | Court should have answered that Harris County filings could not affect Corpus Christi property | Whether filing would affect distant property is immaterial; jury was already instructed that validity/effect of lien is irrelevant | No abuse of discretion; court’s written reply (all evidence before you) was consistent with instructions and harmless |
| Whether Harris County filings were properly characterized (affidavit vs. lien) | Documents labeled "affidavit" and filed as affidavits, not liens | Documents referred repeatedly to "commercial lien," "lien claimant," and "lien debtor," permitting inference of attempted false lien | Jury could reasonably find they attempted to file false liens; insufficiency claim rejected |
| Applicability of U.S.S.G. § 2A6.1(b)(1) enhancement (intent to carry out a threat) | Enhancement requires overt act evidencing intent to carry out a threat; no physical-threats and no overt act beyond filings | Jordan sent notices demanding payment and warned of consensual liens; then executed lien filings—these are overt acts evidencing intent to carry out the threat | Enhancement affirmed: notices plus filings were substantially and directly connected conduct evidencing intent to carry out threats under the Guidelines commentary |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Reed, 668 F.3d 978 (8th Cir. 2012) (statute prohibits filing false/fictitious liens regardless of commercial validity)
- United States v. Neal, 776 F.3d 645 (9th Cir. 2015) (statute focuses on document type and its harmful potential, not existence/validity of collateral)
- United States v. Goynes, 175 F.3d 350 (5th Cir. 1999) (multiple threatening letters alone insufficient for § 2A6.1(b)(1) enhancement without overt acts)
- United States v. Olguin, 643 F.3d 384 (5th Cir. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence; jury-rule de novo review)
- United States v. Ferguson, 211 F.3d 878 (5th Cir. 2000) (preservation and review principles for motions for judgment of acquittal)