U.S. v. Farhane

• Decision Date: 04 February 2011
• Docket Number: 07–5531–cr (CON).,Docket Nos. 07–1968–cr (L)
• Citation: 634 F.3d 127
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Abdulrahman FARHANE, also known as “Abderr Farhan,” and Rafiq Sabir, Defendants–Appellants.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

634 F.3d 127

84 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 794

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,

v.Abdulrahman FARHANE, also known as “Abderr Farhan,” and Rafiq Sabir, Defendants–Appellants.

Docket Nos. 07–1968–cr (L)

07–5531–cr (CON).

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued: Feb. 17, 2009.Decided: Feb. 4, 2011.

Edward D. Wilford (Natali J.H. Todd, on the brief), New York, NY, for Defendant–Appellant.Jennifer G. Rodgers, Assistant United States Attorney (Karl Metzner, Assistant United States Attorney, on the brief), on behalf of Michael J. Garcia, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New York, NY, for Appellee.Before: WINTER, RAGGI, Circuit Judges, and DEARIE, Chief District Judge.¹Judge RAGGI concurs in part in a separate opinion.Judge DEARIE dissents in part in a separate opinion.REENA RAGGI, Circuit Judge:

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦I.¦Background                                              ¦132   ¦
                +------------------------------------------------------------------+
                

   A.   2001: The Initial FBI Investigation into Co–Defendant Tarik Shah                          132
                   B.   2004: Shah Offers to Support al Qaeda                                                       132
                        2005: Shah and Sabir Swear Allegiance to al Qaeda and Attempt To Provide Material Support  
                   C.                                                                                               133
                   D.   Prosecution and Conviction                                                                  133
                

II. Discussion                                                          134
                

   A.  18 U.S.C. § 2339B Is Not Unconstitutionally Vague as Applied to Sabir's Case   134
                

        1.  The Statutory Framework                                     134
                        2.  Sabir's Vagueness Claim                                     136
                

                Sabir Fails to Demonstrate Facial Vagueness or
                            a.  Overbreadth                                             136
                            b.  Sabir Fails To Demonstrate that § 2339B Is              138
                                Unconstitutionally Vague as Applied to his Case
                

                    Sabir's Vagueness Claim Is Properly Reviewed as
                                (1) Applied                                             138
                                (2) The Standards for As–Applied Review                 139
                                    Sabir's Vagueness Challenge to the Statutory
                                (3) Proscriptions Fails                                 140
                                (4) The “Medicine” Exception Does Not Render § 2339B    142
                                    Unconstitutionally Vague as Applied to Sabir
                

   B.  The Trial Evidence Was Sufficient To Support Sabir's Conviction   144
                

        1.  Count One: Conspiracy                                       144
                        2.  Count Two: Attempt                                          145
                

            a.  Intent                                                  145
                            b.  Substantial Step                                        146
                

                    The “Substantial Step” Requirement Expands Attempt
                                (1) Beyond the Common Law                               146
                                    Identifying a Substantial Step by Reference to the
                                (2) Crime Being Attempted                               147
                                    The Evidence Manifests a Substantial Step Towards
                                (3) the Provision of Material Support in the Form of    148
                                    Personnel
                                (4) The Dissent's Mistaken View of the Substantial Step 149
                                    Requirement
                

                        Sabir Did More Than Express a Radical Idea When
                                    (a) He Produced Himself as a Doctor Sworn To Work   149
                                        Under the Direction of al Qaeda
                                        The Provision of Personnel and the Subsequent
                                    (b) Provision of Expert Services by Such Personnel  150
                                        Are Distinct Forms of Material Support
                                        Upholding Sabir's Attempt Conviction Raises No
                                    (c) Double Jeopardy Concerns                        153
                                    (d) No Government Conduct Precluded a Jury Finding  153
                                        of a Substantial Step
                

   C.  The District Court Reasonably Rejected Sabir's Batson Challenge   154
                

        1.  Prospective Juror # 5                                       156
                        2.  Prospective Juror # 26                                      156
                        3.  Prospective Juror # 27                                      157
                

   D.   Sabir's Evidentiary Challenges Are Uniformly Without Merit      158
                

        1.  Expert Witness Testimony                                    158
                

                Kohlmann's Testimony Satisfied the Enumerated
                            a.  Requirements of Rule 702                                158
                            b.  Kohlmann's Testimony Was Helpful to the Jury            159
                            c.  Kohlmann's Testimony Was Relevant                       159
                            d.  Kohlmann's Testimony Did Not Reach Beyond the           160
                                Government's Rule 16 Proffer
                

        2.  Co–Conspirator Statements                                   160
                

                Shah's Recorded Conversations with the Informant and
                            a.  the Undercover Were Admissible Under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d) 160
                                (2)(E)
                            b.  The Admission of Shah's Statements Did Not Violate      162
                                Sabir's Right to Confrontation
                

        3.  Prior Inconsistent Statement                                163
                        4.  State–of–Mind Evidence                                      164
                        5.  Rule 403 Objections                                         164
                

            a.  The Shareef Materials                                   165
                            b.  The Poughkeepsie Mosque Incident                        165
                            c.  Mujahideen Activities in Bosnia                         165
                

   E.   Summation Issues                                                166
                   F.   Juror Misconduct                                                168
                

III. Conclusion                                                         170
                

Defendant Rafiq Sabir, whose birth name is Rene Wright, is a United States citizen and licensed physician who, in May 2005, swore an oath of allegiance to al Qaeda and promised to be on call to treat wounded members of that terrorist organization in Saudi Arabia. Convicted after a jury trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Loretta A. Preska, Chief Judge ) of conspiring to provide and actually providing or attempting to provide material support to a terrorist organization in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, and sentenced to a 300–month term of incarceration, Sabir now challenges his conviction on various grounds. Specifically, he contends that (1) § 2339B is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, (2) the trial evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, (3) the prosecution's peremptory jury challenges exhibited racial bias, (4) evidentiary rulings deprived him of the right of confrontation and/or a fair trial, (5) the district court abused its discretion in addressing alleged juror misconduct, and (6) the prosecution's rebuttal summation deprived him of a fair trial. For the reasons explained in this opinion, we conclude that these arguments lack merit. Accordingly, we affirm Sabir's judgment of conviction.²

I. BackgroundA. 2001: The Initial FBI Investigation into Co–Defendant Tarik Shah

Defendant Rafiq Sabir is a New York licensed physician, trained at Columbia University, who specializes in emergency medicine. In 2001, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating Sabir's longtime friend Tarik Shah for the possible transfer of money to insurgents in Afghanistan. As part of that investigation, an FBI confidential informant known as “Saeed” cultivated a relationship with Shah, in the course of which Shah was recorded speaking openly about his commitment to jihad (holy war) in order to establish Sharia (Islamic law) and about his wish to provide “deadly and dangerous” martial arts training to mujahideen ( jihad warriors). Gov't Exh. (“GX”) 802T at 1–2; GX 803T at 2–4; GX 804T at 3; Trial Tr. at 590–91, 601–03.³ During these conversations, Shah repeatedly identified Sabir as his “partner.” GX 801T at 1; GX 807T at 3; see Trial Tr. at 903–04.

B. 2004: Shah Offers to Support al Qaeda

On March 3, 2004, Saeed and Shah traveled to Plattsburgh, New York, where Saeed introduced Shah to Ali Soufan, an undercover FBI agent posing as a recruiter for al Qaeda.⁴ In a series of recorded meetings with Agent Soufan, Shah detailed his martial arts expertise and offered to travel abroad to train al Qaeda combatants. Shah also told Soufan about Sabir, “an emergency room doctor” who had been his “trusted friend[ ]” for more than 25 years. GX 902T at 2, 7. Explaining that he knew Sabir's “heart,” Shah proposed that the two men join al Qaeda as “a pair, me and a doctor.” Id. at 3, 23. At a subsequent meeting with Saeed, Shah reported that he had spoken in person with Sabir about this plan.

Shah and Agent Soufan next met in Orlando, Florida, in April 2004, at which time Shah agreed to prepare a syllabus for a martial arts training course as well as a training video. Shah also questioned Soufan at this meeting about al Qaeda suicide bombings and asked whether he could receive, as well as provide, terrorist training.

C. 2005: Shah and Sabir Swear Allegiance to al Qaeda and Attempt To Provide Material Support

For most of the time between May 2004 and May 2005, Sabir was out of the United States, working at a Saudi military hospital in Riyadh. On May 20, 2005, during a visit to New York, Sabir met with Saeed and Agent Soufan at Shah's Bronx apartment. Sabir told Soufan that he would soon be returning to Riyadh. He expressed interest in meeting with mujahi...