United States v. William Boswell
772 F.3d 469
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Boswell was indicted for being a felon in possession of two revolvers following an ATF sting in January 2011; an undercover informant (White) purchased the guns and audio recordings were made.
- At trial White, ATF agents, and Boswell’s probation officer identified Boswell’s voice on the recordings; Boswell testified and denied both the sale and that the voice was his.
- On direct, Boswell said he did not "mess with" or "use" guns; on cross-examination the government questioned him about a revolver tattoo on his neck to impeach his credibility.
- The jury convicted Boswell; at sentencing the probation office designated him an Armed Career Criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), producing a mandatory minimum 15-year term.
- Boswell appealed, arguing (1) admission of testimony about his gun tattoo was irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial, and (2) his ACCA predicates were not charged in the indictment or proved to the jury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Government) | Defendant's Argument (Boswell) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of testimony about a firearm tattoo | Tattoo inquiry is admissible to impeach defendant who put credibility at issue by testifying he "doesn't mess with" guns | Tattoo is irrelevant (Rule 401) and unfairly prejudicial (Rule 403); too tenuous a connection to impeach | Allowed: Tattoo inquiry was relevant impeachment; no reversible Rule 403 error under deferential review |
| Sufficiency of ACCA enhancement (need to allege/pr oof prior convictions to jury) | Recidivism is a sentencing fact the judge may find; Almendarez‑Torres controls | Boswell: prior convictions used for ACCA must be alleged in indictment and proven to a jury (Fifth/Sixth Amendment claim) | Rejected: Almendarez‑Torres remains binding; sentencing factor may be found by judge |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Boros, 668 F.3d 901 (7th Cir. 2012) (deferential review of district court relevancy rulings)
- United States v. McKibbins, 656 F.3d 707 (7th Cir. 2011) (broad Rule 401 relevance standard)
- United States v. Abel, 469 U.S. 45 (1984) (evidence admissible for proper impeachment purpose)
- Brown v. United States, 365 U.S. 148 (1961) (defendant who testifies exposes credibility to cross-examination)
- United States v. Thomas, 321 F.3d 627 (7th Cir. 2003) (Rule 403 prejudice analysis for tattoo evidence)
- Almendarez‑Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998) (recidivism is a sentencing factor, not an element of the offense)