U.S. v. Eric Dewayne Boyd

Decision Date07 April 2011
Docket NumberNo. 08–6402.,08–6402.
Citation85 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 74,640 F.3d 657
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,v.Eric Dewayne BOYD, Defendant–Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

ARGUED: Bradley L. Henry, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Zachary Charles Bolitho, Assistant United States Attorney, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Bradley L. Henry, A. Philip Lomonaco, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Zachary Charles Bolitho, Tracy L. Stone, Assistant United States Attorney, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee.Before: SILER, GILMAN, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

SILER, Circuit Judge.

Eric Boyd appeals his conviction by a jury of (1) being an accessory after the fact to a carjacking that resulted in serious bodily injury and death in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3, and (2) misprision of a carjacking that resulted in serious bodily injury and death in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4. On appeal, Boyd alleges evidentiary errors, duplicitous indictment, and prosecutorial misconduct. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. Facts Leading to the Indictment Against Boyd

On Saturday, January 6, 2007, Christopher Newsom and his girlfriend, Channon Christian, drove to dinner and planned to attend a party. Newsom and Christian were later found brutally carjacked, raped, and murdered. Newsom's body was discovered first, beside the railroad tracks in the early afternoon of January 7, 2007, by a train engineer.

Christian's mother soon filed a missing person report, and searchers found Christian's abandoned Toyota vehicle on Chipman Street in Knoxville. In Christian's Toyota, the police found a fingerprint belonging to Lemaricus Davidson. Davidson lived at 2316 Chipman Street, a short distance from where the Toyota was found. When officers executed a search warrant at the residence later that day, they found Christian's body in a trash can in the kitchen. Christian had semen in her body cavities and on her clothing, and DNA testing revealed that some of the semen belonged to Davidson.

The police then undertook a manhunt for Davidson. Officers soon learned of a number of telephone calls between Davidson and Boyd. Officers stopped a vehicle Boyd was driving, and asked him for information about Davidson's whereabouts. Boyd initially denied knowing Davidson, but later told officers that he wasn't going to do any time in jail” and would tell them where Davidson was hiding. Boyd told the officers that Davidson was in a house that the two of them had broken into.

Boyd provided directions to the house. The house was vacant with a “for sale” sign in the yard. The officers arrested Davidson inside and found food wrappings, scraps of lettuce, a McDonald's bag, and a can of potato chips. They also found clothing, a cell phone, binoculars, and a pistol.

Boyd voluntarily returned to the Knoxville police station later that day for a follow-up interview. He recounted details of Davidson's role in the carjacking and murders, which Davidson had related to him. Boyd stated that he agreed to help Davidson avoid arrest. Boyd also admitted seeing newscasts about the crimes prior to and during the time period that he assisted Davidson.

B. Boyd's Trial

Boyd was indicted on two charges: (1) being an accessory after the fact to a carjacking leading to serious bodily injury and death, and (2) misprision of a felony. An individual is guilty of being an accessory after the fact when he, “knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment.” 18 U.S.C. § 3. Misprision of a felony occurs when a person, “having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States.” 18 U.S.C. § 4.

Prior to his trial, Boyd moved to exclude the portions of his videotaped interview in which he discussed the things Davidson told him about the carjacking, rapes, and murders. He argued that Davidson's statements were inadmissible hearsay and violated the Confrontation Clause. The district court denied the motion, determining that Davidson's statements to Boyd were non-hearsay offered to prove Boyd's knowledge, rather than the truth of the matter asserted. The court also found that the statements posed no Confrontation Clause issue.

At trial, the Government presented over 30 witnesses. The proof revealed that on January 9, 2007, Boyd took Davidson to Danielle Lightfoot's apartment. Boyd's cousin, Kevin Armstrong, later arrived at the apartment. Armstrong was surprised to see Davidson, because he knew Davidson was wanted by the police. While Boyd stood by silently, Armstrong told Davidson he should talk with the police. Davidson called Armstrong throughout the night asking for a ride “down west,” which he refused.

At noon on January 10, 2007, Boyd and Davidson watched the local news at Lightfoot's apartment. A picture of Davidson flashed across the screen, and Davidson claimed his brother committed the reported crimes. Lightfoot soon left the apartment, telling Boyd and Davidson they could remain in her apartment until nightfall. When she returned later that night to find Boyd and Davidson still in her apartment, she asked them to leave.

While police officers searched for Davidson, Boyd and Davidson hid in an area behind the apartment complex. As Davidson hid in a ditch, Boyd went to Lakeisha Greer's apartment and tried unsuccessfully to obtain a ride for Davidson. Boyd returned to Davidson's hiding place, and the two then broke into a nearby vacant house. The next morning, on January 11, 2007, Boyd left the vacant house to get food for Davidson. To ensure they could communicate, Boyd gave Davidson his cell phone and developed a code system. Boyd would call Davidson twice in quick succession so that Davidson would know it was Boyd, and then Davidson would call Boyd back at the number that appeared.

When Boyd was on his way back to the vacant house that morning, he encountered Greer's sister, Leesa. Boyd told Leesa he was getting food for Davidson. Later that morning, Boyd went to Kadiatu Kamara's apartment. Kamara agreed to let Boyd use her phone. Telephone records show several calls were made in quick succession from Kamara's phone to Boyd's cell phone. Later that day, Boyd was stopped by the police and revealed Davidson's location.

Dr. Darinka Mileusnic–Polchan, the Chief Medical Examiner for Knox County, testified about the autopsies she performed on Christian and Newsom. She testified that 80% of Newsom's body was “severely charred” and smelled of gasoline. Newsom had been bound, gagged, and shot three times. She also testified that Newsom experienced “sexual trauma” prior to his death. Boyd did not object to Dr. Mileusnic–Polchan's testimony regarding Newsom's autopsy.

Dr. Mileusnic–Polchan then described the autopsy of Christian. She stated that Christian had been tied up, forced into a fetal position, and stuffed into the trash can. Christian was naked from the waist down with a trash bag tied over her head.

Dr. Mileusnic–Polchan's testimony continued into the evening, and she was asked to finish her testimony the following morning. After the jury was excused, Boyd offered to stipulate that Christian and Newsom suffered serious bodily injury and death. He argued that any further testimony by the medical examiner would be unnecessary and prejudicial. The Government argued that Boyd had refused to stipulate to “anything” prior to trial. The Government also responded that it was required to prove serious bodily injury and death, and it was entitled to prove those elements by testimony rather than stipulation.

The district court denied Boyd's motion, determining that a stipulation requires the agreement of both parties. It also held that Dr. Mileusnic–Polchan's testimony was relevant evidence, and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The court stated that the jury would be instructed at the close of the case regarding the “parameters under which” it could make its decision.

The next morning, Dr. Mileusnic–Polchan described the severe sexual assault and blunt force trauma inflicted upon Christian. She concluded that Christian died from a combination of mechanical and positional asphyxia, which she described as a slow death that likely came in the afternoon or evening hours of January 7, 2007.

During jury instructions, the district court stated, “I want to emphasize that the Defendant is only on trial for the particular crimes charged in the second superseding indictment.” The court further stated that [t]he Defendant is not charged with actually committing the crime of carjacking which resulted in the death and serious bodily injury to another person. Instead, he is charged with helping someone else try to avoid being arrested, prosecuted or punished for that crime.” As to Boyd's videotaped statements, the court emphasized that “you may only use [Davidson's] statements for the purpose of determining the Defendant's notice and knowledge of Lemaricus Davidson's involvement in the carjacking, not to determine whether the Government has proved the elements of the carjacking against Lemaricus Davidson.”

The jury found Boyd guilty of both counts. The district court sentenced Boyd to 180 months for being an accessory after the fact, and 36 months for misprision of a felony, the statutory maximum terms of imprisonment on each count.

II.

A. Admissibility of Davidson's Statements to Boydi. Hearsay

Whether a statement constitutes hearsay is a legal question that we review de novo. Biegas v. Quickway Carriers, Inc., 573 F.3d 365, 378 (6th Cir.2009). Hearsay is an out-of-court statement ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
113 cases
  • United States v. Rios
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 21 Julio 2016
    ...jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.” We review for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Boyd , 640 F.3d 657, 667 (6th Cir.), cert. denied , ––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 271, 181 L.Ed.2d 160 (2011). Gang-affiliation evidence may be highly probative......
  • United States v. Lawrence
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 22 Octubre 2013
    ...from Hurst's family members. Evidentiary rulings are generally reviewed for abuse of discretion. See, e.g., United States v. Boyd, 640 F.3d 657, 668 (6th Cir. 2011). "The district court abuses its discretion when it relies on clearly erroneous findings of fact, uses an erroneous legal stand......
  • United States v. Odeh
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 25 Febrero 2016
    ...The general rule is that a "defendant has no right to selectively stipulate to particular elements of the offense." United States v. Boyd, 640 F.3d 657, 668 (6th Cir.2011) (quoting United States v. Hebeka, 25 F.3d 287, 291 (6th Cir.1994) ) (internal quotation marks omitted). In Old Chief v.......
  • United States v. Collins
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 24 Agosto 2015
    ...Misconduct We “review claims of prosecutorial misconduct that were objected to in the trial court de novo.” United States v. Boyd, 640 F.3d 657, 669 (6th Cir.2011) ; United States v. Henry, 545 F.3d 367, 376 (6th Cir.2008) (“Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct contain mixed questions of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT