526 F. App'x 29
2d Cir.2013Background
- Williams was convicted by jury of possession of a firearm by a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and sentenced to 192 months' imprisonment.
- On appeal, Williams challenged the denial of his suppression motion seeking to exclude the firearm found in his possession.
- Prior to stopping Williams, Stockton observed him swaying in the middle of the street at night in a high-crime area, which, along with time and location, contributed to reasonable suspicion.
- After approach, Williams’s hostile response and a visible “bulge” on his thigh supported a frisk for officer safety.
- Williams raised entrapment by estoppel and manufactured jurisdiction defenses, and raised other challenges including prosecutorial misconduct, jury instructions, and Speedy Trial Act issues; the district court’s rulings on these matters were sustained on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression standard and stop/ frisk validity | Williams challenges the stop as lacking reasonable suspicion | Government asserts totality of circumstances supported stop | Stop valid; reasonable suspicion shown |
| Entrapment by estoppel and manufactured jurisdiction | Defense asserts entrapment by estoppel and outrageous government conduct | Government argues no entrapment/deficient jurisdiction | No entitlement to relief on either theory |
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing and related claims | Closing statements improperly emphasized law and status | Closing was proper and within latitude of inferences | No reversible error from closing |
| Jury instructions and innocents possession defense | Requests on entrapment by estoppel and innocent possession denied | Instructions adequately conveyed elements; no prejudice | No reversible error in jury instructions |
| Speedy Trial Act and related indictment challenges | Delay violated 3161(b) beyond 30 days | Ends-of-justice continuance excluded period; indictment timely | Speedy Trial Act claim rejected |
| Multiplicity/duplicitous indictment | Indictment potentially duplicitous/multiplicitous | No prejudice since conviction on a single count | No prejudice; no reversible error from indictment structure |
| Armed Career Criminal Act status | Prior felonies do not establish ACCA; error possible | Prior NY felonies categorically qualify as violent felonies | Williams properly classified as armed career criminal |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (standard for reasonable suspicion in street encounters)
- United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989) (reasonable suspicion requires minimal objective justification)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (protective frisk may follow a valid stop of a person believed armed)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (original framework for investigatory stops and frisks)
- United States v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) (bulge in clothing may justify frisk for safety)