United States v. Wakinyan McArthur
850 F.3d 925
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendants Anthony Cree, William Morris, and Wakinyan McArthur were members/leaders of the Native Mob, a Minnesota prison/street gang implicated in drug trafficking and violent acts between ~2009–2011.
- Investigations (recordings, surveillance, GPS) led to a multi-count federal indictment charging RICO conspiracy, drug-conspiracy counts, multiple § 924(c) firearm offenses, attempted murder and assault in aid of racketeering, and other charges; all three were convicted after a six-week trial.
- Cree was convicted of RICO conspiracy, drug-conspiracy, and multiple counts connected to the LaDuke shooting; he was sentenced to 292 months.
- Morris was convicted for the LaDuke shooting and possession of a firearm as a felon; the district court applied the ACCA enhancement based on three Minnesota third-degree burglary convictions and sentenced him to 360 months on the § 922(g) count (420 months total).
- McArthur (Mob Chief) was convicted of RICO conspiracy, drug conspiracy, and two § 924(c) counts tied to separate violent episodes (Raisch home shooting and Wilke home invasion); the district court imposed consecutive § 924(c) sentences totaling 516 months.
- On appeal the Eighth Circuit reviewed sufficiency-of-evidence claims (Cree, Morris), ACCA categorization of Morris’s Minnesota burglaries post-Mathis, and several sentencing/instruction/double-jeopardy issues for McArthur.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for Cree’s RICO conspiracy and related drug and shooting convictions | Gov: evidence showed the Native Mob was an enterprise, Cree participated in drug distribution and aided the LaDuke shooting | Cree: Mob was a loose assembly; no proof he agreed to a pattern of racketeering or knowingly participated in the shooting | Affirmed: reasonable jury could find enterprise, pattern of racketeering, drug conspiracy, and Cree’s complicity in the LaDuke attack |
| Sufficiency / membership intent for Morris’s §1959 attempted murder and assault in aid of racketeering | Gov: Morris was a Mob member and shot LaDuke to maintain/increase status | Morris: insufficient proof he was a Mob member or that shooting was to gain status | Affirmed: sufficient evidence of membership, motive tied to Mob status |
| Construction of Morris’s prior Minnesota third-degree burglary convictions under ACCA after Mathis | Gov (later): statute indivisible and qualifies as generic burglary; earlier argued modified-categorical use | Morris: statute indivisible and broader than generic burglary; convictions do not qualify as violent felonies | Reversed sentence: Minnesota third-degree burglary is indivisible but broader than generic burglary; ACCA enhancement vacated; remanded for resentencing |
| Validity of McArthur’s two consecutive §924(c) convictions and related jury instructions | Gov: convictions proper; requests to vacate one §924(c) based on DOJ policy; jury instructions sufficient | McArthur: consecutive §924(c) for a single predicate offense violates double jeopardy or Rosemond requires specific advance-knowledge instruction | Court: Vacated one §924(c) conviction at government’s request (Rinaldi policy analog); rejected plain-error Rosemond challenge; affirmed remaining convictions; vacated entire sentence and remanded for resentencing under sentencing-package doctrine |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Paris, 816 F.3d 1037 (8th Cir.) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Boyle v. United States, 556 U.S. 938 (2009) (definition of an "association-in-fact" RICO enterprise)
- Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981) (RICO enterprise concept)
- H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Tel. Co., 492 U.S. 229 (1989) (requirements for a RICO pattern: relatedness and continuity)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (definition of generic burglary for ACCA analysis)
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013) (categorical vs. modified-categorical approach)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (distinguishing elements from means for divisible statutes)
- Rosemond v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1240 (2014) (advance-knowledge requirement for aiding-and-abetting a §924(c) offense)
- Rinaldi v. United States, 434 U.S. 22 (1977) (court should grant government’s belated request to dismiss or otherwise give effect to internal prosecution policies)
- Greenlaw v. United States, 554 U.S. 237 (2008) (sentencing-package doctrine allowing vacatur of entire sentence for resentencing when part of sentence is affected on appeal)