U.S. v. Haynie, 98-1165

Decision Date09 June 1999
Docket NumberNo. 98-1165,98-1165
Citation179 F.3d 1048
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark HAYNIE, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Before CUMMINGS, BAUER, and EVANS, Circuit Judges.

TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge.

After a bench trial, Mark Haynie was convicted of conspiracy to possess illegal firearms, conspiracy to use firearms during the commission of drug trafficking crimes, and conspiracy to distribute cocaine. He appeals, arguing that the district court erred on two evidentiary issues.

Haynie is a member of the Four Corners Hustlers street gang, a group, according to the evidence, that operates on the west side of Chicago. In the spring of 1994 Angelo Roberts, one of the leaders of the gang, was convicted on state criminal charges and sent to the Illinois River Correctional Center in central Illinois. Apparently undeterred by his personal experience with the fact that crime does not pay, Roberts hatched a plan to purchase an arsenal of handguns and military-style weapons for his gang. He wanted the gang to be able to wipe out its competition and even talked about blowing up the 11th District police station because the police there were interfering with the Hustlers' drug trade.

Roberts contacted Daren Stacee Hardaway, who had previously supplied guns to the gang. Unbeknownst to Roberts, however, Hardaway had been arrested by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in the interim and had agreed to cooperate in the ATF's efforts to nab his former customers. Hardaway visited Roberts in prison, and ATF agents listened in on their conversations and recorded them. In coded language the two men discussed the purchase, and Roberts wrote out a list of the weapons he wanted. Roberts also said that his right-hand man, who, as luck would have it, turned out to be Haynie, would do the deal on his behalf. Roberts said that Haynie would transport the weapons using a U-Haul truck loaded with furniture and hide the weapons in the furniture.

The next day, Roberts and Hardaway spoke by telephone, and again the ATF recorded the conversation. Hardaway suggested that the gang's payment for the weapons be half in cash and half in cocaine. Roberts agreed and said that gang member Shawn Ivy would supply the money and drugs. After further phone negotiations with Hardaway, Roberts called Haynie to give him the skinny on the deal. The Illinois correctional authorities recorded the call. Roberts told Haynie to get a U-Haul and to staple "it" to the bottom of the furniture, and Haynie agreed that he would. Roberts explained the terms of payment and the different types of weapons Haynie would receive. Haynie assented and showed his enthusiasm for the enterprise: "Yeah, then we'll be bad as a motherfucker too [after we get the guns]."

A few weeks later Haynie called Hardaway to say he was "going to grab on that merch" (pick up the guns) and that he was "fixing to grab everything that he [Roberts] said that you had." He closed by telling Hardaway that he was going to call Roberts and ask him again how many of each item he was supposed to purchase. A short time later Roberts and Hardaway again spoke on the phone and agreed that the transaction would take place during the upcoming week.

The deal was postponed for a time when Haynie suffered his own bout of incarceration at the hands of the Illinois authorities. After Haynie and Roberts were released and after further recorded haggling with Hardaway, the day of the big transaction finally arrived. The plan called for Hardaway to meet the gang members in a parking lot where they would exchange the weapons for cash and drugs. But Roberts, who decided to personally oversee the deal, could not locate Ivy, who was supposed to supply the cash and cocaine for payment. Instead, Roberts drafted James Frazier, another gang member, to pay for the guns. Understandably cautious, Roberts and Frazier then recruited a 16-year-old boy to meet Hardaway with the drugs and money and tell him to drop off the guns at another location. ATF agents were waiting with Hardaway and arrested the boy. News of the arrest got back to Roberts and Frazier, and they vamoosed. Later they met with Haynie, who assured Frazier that he would make sure Frazier was repaid for the drugs and money the ATF had seized. Frazier, Ivy, and Haynie were eventually picked up and brought to trial. Roberts was murdered before he could be arrested. Haynie and Ivy were tried jointly for their part in the plan. District Judge James B. Moran, after hearing the evidence, convicted Haynie and acquitted Ivy.

On appeal, Haynie challenges (1) the district court decision to admit the tape-recorded conversations between Roberts and Hardaway, and (2) the district court decision to allow the testimony of Frazier regarding Haynie's statements and actions after the deal fell apart. We review Judge Moran's evidentiary decisions for clear error. See United States v. Guyton, 36 F.3d 655, 658 (7th Cir.1994); United States v. Saulter, 60 F.3d 270, 275 (7th Cir.1995). The record reveals nothing approaching error, clear or otherwise.

Before the trial, the government proffered...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • BP AMOCO CHEMICAL CO. v. FLINT HILLS RESOURCES
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • March 25, 2010
    ...of the documents at trial when Flint Hills sought to admit them. Accordingly, it has waived this argument. United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048, 1050-51 (7th Cir. 1999). Finally, BP Amoco asserts that Flint Hills' employee witnesses lacked the necessary knowledge, skill, experience, train......
  • United States v. Cardena
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • November 18, 2016
    ...if the government makes a showing that it can and will meet the requirements for admissibility during trial. United States v. Haynie , 179 F.3d 1048, 1050 (7th Cir. 1999). If, however, after the government rests, it "has not met its burden to show that the statements are admissible, the def......
  • U.S. v. Are
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • December 30, 2009
    ...567 F.3d 911 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 652, 78 U.S.L.W. 3294 (U.S. Nov. 16, 2009) (No. 09-7065); United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048 (7th Cir.1999). Jerome Murray (the "Chief" of the gang) and Julius Statham pled guilty; Antwan Daniels and Oluwadamilola Are were tried by a jury......
  • Johnson v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of Illinois
    • March 27, 2017
    ...statements are admissible, the defendant can move for a mistrial or request that the court strike the statements. United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048, 1050 (7th Cir. 1999). On February 3, 2005, trial counsel filed a Motion for Government to Produce Santiago Proffer Prior to Trial. Crim.,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Federal criminal conspiracy.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 47 No. 2, March 2010
    • March 22, 2010
    ...at 960-61 (applying Bourjaily requirements to review decision in lower court to admit evidence against Bowman); United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048, 1050-51 (7th Cir. 1999) (stating the requirements and defendant's options should prosecutor fail to show requirements for admission of coco......
  • Federal criminal conspiracy.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 42 No. 2, March 2005
    • March 22, 2005
    ...at 960-61 (applying Bourjaily requirements to review decision in lower court to admit evidence against Bowman); United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048, 1050-51 (7th Cir. 1999) (stating the requirements and defendant's options should prosecutor fail to show requirements for admission of co-c......
  • Federal criminal conspiracy.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 43 No. 2, March 2006
    • March 22, 2006
    ...at 960-61 (applying Bourjaily requirements to review decision in lower court to admit evidence against Bowman); United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048, 1050-51 (7th Cir. 1999) (stating the requirements and defendant's options should prosecutor fail to show requirements for admission of co-c......
  • Federal criminal conspiracy.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 44 No. 2, March 2007
    • March 22, 2007
    ...at 960-61 (applying Bourjaily requirements to review decision in lower court to admit evidence against Bowman); United States v. Haynie, 179 F.3d 1048, 1050-51 (7th Cir. 1999) (stating the requirements and defendant's options should prosecutor fail to show requirements for admission of co-c......

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