United States v. Yancey Jack Garringer
713 F. App'x 894
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Yancey Jack Garringer was convicted in a bench trial of three counts under 18 U.S.C. § 1521 for filing false liens/encumbrances against federal law-enforcement officials.
- Garringer filed UCC-3 forms that listed federal employees by name and title and appended "/DEBTOR" after each name, and described large, incoherent collateral (e.g., a $600 million bond).
- Garringer argued the filings were not true liens because they misused the UCC form (wrong box), did not describe the employees’ actual property, and he intended to benefit (not harm) the employees.
- The district court denied Garringer’s motion for judgment of acquittal; he appealed, contesting sufficiency of the evidence under § 1521.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed sufficiency de novo but affirms convictions if any reasonable trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Garringer) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Garringer’s UCC filings constituted a "false lien or encumbrance" against federal employees’ real or personal property under § 1521 | The filings were not true liens: wrong box on the UCC form, no description of actual property, legally ineffective | Filings were public filings that labeled officials as "/DEBTOR," would appear in public records and could deter third-party lenders, and thus functioned as false encumbrances | Affirmed — filings were false encumbrances for § 1521 purposes despite technical legal ineffectiveness |
| Whether Garringer’s subjective intent or belief (that he meant to benefit officials or honestly believed filings valid) negates culpability | Asserted good-faith belief and benign intent should preclude conviction | Knowledge requirement is satisfied if defendant knew or should have known the liens were false; an honest but unreasonable belief is not a defense | Affirmed — a subjective but unreasonable belief does not bar conviction; intent to harass inferred from filings |
| Whether incoherent collateral descriptions (e.g., $600M bond) preclude finding of a "false" lien | Lack of actual collateral means no encumbrance on employees’ property | Falsity can exist regardless of legal validity; incoherence and fabricated collateral underscore falsity | Affirmed — falsity remains; legal insufficiency is the kind of false filings § 1521 targets |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Reed, 668 F.3d 978 (8th Cir.) (upheld § 1521 conviction where incoherent financing statement identified federal judge and prosecutor as debtors; focused on effect on third-party searchers and harassment purpose)
- United States v. Neal, 776 F.3d 645 (9th Cir.) (affirmed conviction under § 1521; validity of lien not required)
- United States v. Jordan, 851 F.3d 393 (5th Cir.) (affirmed § 1521 conviction; reading ‘false’ out of statute rejected)
- United States v. Williamson, 746 F.3d 987 (10th Cir.) (defendant can be guilty even if he honestly believed lien proper, so long as belief was not reasonable)