United States v. Wells
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 20745
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- In 2007 the BLM closed part of Recapture Canyon (near Blanding, UT) to ATV use to protect soils and archaeological resources; the closure remained in effect in 2014.
- Phil Lyman (San Juan County Commissioner) organized a protest ATV ride into the closed area on May 10, 2014; Monte Wells (local commentator/journalist) promoted the ride and rode with others.
- Lyman and Wells were tried by jury on misdemeanor counts: operating ATVs on lands closed by the BLM and conspiracy to do so; both were convicted, sentenced to brief imprisonment and probation, and ordered to pay restitution (Lyman ≈ $96,000; Wells jointly and severally $48,000).
- Post-trial issues included alleged judicial bias (Judge Shelby later recused for sentencing), a suppressed 1979 BLM map (argued to show an R.S. 2477 right-of-way), challenges to sufficiency of charges/evidence, First Amendment and interdependence arguments, and restitution and ineffective-assistance claims.
- The Tenth Circuit affirmed: no entitlement to a new trial for failure to recuse; motions to dismiss and sufficiency challenges rejected; Brady claim based on the map fails for lack of materiality; restitution order and amounts upheld; Lyman’s ineffective-assistance claim not reached on direct appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Judicial recusal / new trial | Judge Shelby’s friendship with SUWA’s director plus SUWA’s pretrial involvement and Bloch’s presence at trial created an appearance of partiality requiring earlier recusal/new trial | Judge did not know of SUWA’s pretrial role during trial; adverse rulings and ordinary courtroom administration do not require recusal | No abuse of discretion; reasonable observer would not conclude recusal required during trial; new trial denied |
| Motion to dismiss — First Amendment (Wells) | Prosecution targeted protected speech; manner/means of conspiracy were only speech so indictment should be dismissed | No evidence of prosecutorial vindictiveness; defendants must prove actual or likely vindictiveness | Denial affirmed; First Amendment bar not established |
| Motion to dismiss — conspiracy interdependence (Lyman) | Superseding information failed to allege interdependent coconspirator conduct | Charging instrument alleged joint publicity, videos, and coordinated ride sufficient to show interdependence | Denial affirmed; indictment sufficiently alleged interdependence |
| Sufficiency of evidence (Wells) — journalist vs conspirator | Wells claims he acted as a journalist reporting and not as an agreeing coconspirator | Government produced postings, video statements, reposts urging participation, and proof Wells rode in closed area | Conviction sustained; evidence permitted jury to find Wells knowingly joined conspiracy |
| Brady (suppressed 1979 map alleging R.S. 2477 route) | Map would have supported an R.S. 2477 right-of-way defense or bolstered good-faith belief that area was open, warranting new trial | Map was not material: single dashed line with no indication of extent, scope, or ATV use; insufficient to create reasonable probability of different outcome | Brady fails for lack of materiality; new trial denied |
| Restitution (causation and amount) | Defendants argue restitution includes non-causal harms, speculative archaeological costs, and unsupported estimates | Government presented before/after photos, damage assessment requested by BLM for law enforcement, and proved but-for and proximate causation and supported amounts by preponderance | Affirmed: restitution lawful under MVRA; government met but-for and proximate causation; assessment costs admissible and not speculative |
| Ineffective assistance (Lyman) | Counsel was constitutionally ineffective (raised on direct appeal) | Such claims normally require developed record and belong in collateral proceedings | Claim not addressed on merits and dismissed as inappropriate for direct appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Liljeberg v. Health Servs. Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847 (judge recusal/appearance-of-impropriety standard)
- United States v. Speakman, 594 F.3d 1165 (10th Cir.) (MVRA causation: but-for and proximate causation analysis)
- United States v. Quarrell, 310 F.3d 664 (10th Cir.) (limitations on including speculative archaeological value in restitution)
- United States v. Dazey, 403 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir.) (elements of conspiracy)
- United States v. Nickl, 427 F.3d 1286 (10th Cir.) (recusal/new-trial principles; adverse rulings do not automatically show bias)
- Turner v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1885 (Supreme Court) (Brady/materiality described as evidence being "too little, too weak, too distant")