U.S. v. Honken, No. CR 01-3047-MWB.
| Court | United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa |
| Writing for the Court | Bennett |
| Citation | 381 F.Supp.2d 936 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Dustin Lee HONKEN, Defendant. |
| Decision Date | 29 July 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. CR 01-3047-MWB. |
v.
Dustin Lee HONKEN, Defendant.
Page 937
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 938
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 939
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 940
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 941
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 942
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 943
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 944
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Page 945
Alfredo G. Parrish, Parrish, Kruidenier, Moss, Dunn, Montgomery, Boles & Gribble, LLP, Des Moines, IA, Charles Myers Rogers, Wyrsch, Hobbs & Mirakian, PC, Kansas City, MO, Leon F. Spies, Mellon & Spies, Iowa City, IA, for Defendant.
Charles J. Williams, Patrick J. Reinert, U.S. Attorney's Office Northern District of Iowa, Thomas Henry Miller, AAG, Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL OR NEW TRIAL
BENNETT, Chief Judge.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. SYNOPSIS AND SUMMARY OF DISPOSITION .....................................................949
II. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................951
A. Background ..........................................................................951
1. The 1993 case ...................................................................951
2. The 1996 case ...................................................................952
3. Discovery of the murder victims' bodies .........................................952
4. The indictments in this case ....................................................953
a. Non-capital charges .........................................................953
b. Capital charges .............................................................953
5. Significant pre-trial rulings ...................................................954
6. Honken's trial and conviction ...................................................956
a. Jury selection ..............................................................956
b. The "merits phase" ..........................................................957
c. The "penalty phase" .........................................................958
7. Post-trial proceedings ..........................................................960
a. The motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial ...........................960
b. The motion to investigate juror misconduct ..................................960
c. Oral arguments ..............................................................962
III. LEGAL ANALYSIS ..........................................................................962
A. Applicable Standards ................................................................962
1. Judgment of acquittal ...........................................................962
2. New trial .......................................................................963
C. Alleged Erroneous Pre-trial Rulings .................................................964
1. Former jeopardy .................................................................964
a. The prior ruling ............................................................964
b. Arguments of the parties ....................................................966
c. Analysis of the renewed challenge ...........................................966
2. Disqualification of the trial judge .............................................967
a. Factual background ..........................................................967
b. Arguments of the parties ....................................................968
c. Applicable standards ........................................................969
d. Analysis ....................................................................973
3. Shackling of the defendant during trial .........................................977
Page 946
a. The prior ruling ............................................................977
b. Arguments of the parties ....................................................978
c. Analysis ....................................................................979
4. Use of an "anonymous" jury ......................................................981
a. The prior ruling ............................................................981
b. Arguments of the parties ....................................................982
c. Analysis ....................................................................983
D. Alleged Errors During Jury Selection ................................................984
1. Factual background ..............................................................984
a. Juror 902 ...................................................................984
b. Prospective Juror 538 .......................................................986
c. Prospective Juror 813 .......................................................987
2. Arguments of the parties ........................................................989
3. Analysis ........................................................................990
a. Applicable standards ........................................................990
i. Jurors on whom the claim can be based ................................990
ii. The standard for an "impartial" juror ................................991
iii. The standard for erroneous rulings on motions to strike
jurors ..............................................................992
b. Application of the standards ................................................993
i. Juror 902 .............................................................993
ii. Prospective Juror 538 .................................................994
iii. Prospective Juror 813 .................................................994
E. Alleged Errors During Trial .........................................................995
1. Hearsay and Confrontation Clause errors .........................................996
a. Statements of Nicholson and DeGeus ..........................................996
b. Co-conspirator hearsay ......................................................997
i. Angela Johnson's writings and maps .....................................997
ii. The telephone call to Rick Held ........................................998
c. Agent Mizell's testimony ....................................................999
i. The evidence in question ..............................................999
ii. Arguments of the parties ..............................................999
iii. Analysis .............................................................1000
2. Restrictions on cross-examination of Timothy Cutkomp ...........................1001
3. Denial of the motion for mistrial based on Scott Gahn's testimony ..............1002
a. The testimony in question ..................................................1003
b. Arguments of the parties ...................................................1003
c. Analysis ...................................................................1004
4. Cumulative effect of erroneous evidentiary rulings .............................1005
5. Alleged errors in "penalty phase" jury instructions ............................1005
a. Arguments of the parties ...................................................1005
b. Analysis ...................................................................1006
i. Improper weighing of mental state as an aggravating
factor .............................................................1006
ii. Improper consideration of obstruction of justice as an
aggravating factor .................................................1007
F. Alleged Insufficiency Of The Evidence ..............................................1009
1. Non-capital offenses ...........................................................1009
2. Capital offenses ...............................................................1010
a. Alleged insufficiency of the circumstantial case ...........................1010
b. Alleged insufficiency of the evidence on specific Counts ...................1010
i. Insufficiency of the evidence on the "conspiracy murder"
counts .............................................................1010
ii. Insufficiency of the evidence on the "CCE murder"
counts .............................................................1012
G. Alleged Jury Misconduct Revealed By Johnson Juror 16 ...............................1014
1. Factual and procedural background ..............................................1014
2. Arguments of the parties .......................................................1014
3. Analysis .......................................................................1015
H. Alleged Jury "Taint" Relating To Honken Juror 523 ..................................1017
Page 947
1. Factual background .............................................................1017
a. Proceedings on October 21, 2004 ............................................1017
b. Proceedings on October 22, 2004 ............................................1020
c. Proceedings on October 25, 2004 ............................................1022
i. Instructions to trial jurors .........................................1022
ii. Questioning of trial jurors ..........................................1023
iii. Instruction to alternate jurors ......................................1024
iv. Questioning of alternate jurors ......................................1025
v. Post-questioning proceedings .........................................1025
d. Proceedings on December 16, 2004 ...........................................1026
i. Questioning of officers and managers .................................1026
ii. Further questioning of Juror 523 .....................................1029
2. Findings of fact ...............................................................1032
a....To continue reading
Request your trial
14 practice notes
-
United States v. Johnson, No. CR 01-3046-MWB
...the principal in the murders, he received the death penalty only for the murders of the children. See, e.g., United States v. Honken, 381 F. Supp. 2d 936 (N.D. Iowa 2005) (denying Honken's post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial). The jury in Johnson's case also convicted h......
-
Johnson v. United States, No. C 09-3064-MWB
...(N.D. Iowa 2005) (297 page (175 page printed) opinion denying the defendant's request for post-trial relief); United States v. Honken, 381 F. Supp. 2d 936 (N.D. Iowa 2005) (206 page (128 page printed) denying the defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial). 3.The level of dys......
-
U.S. v. Johnson, No. CR 01-3046-MWB.
...trial, the court entered a two-hundred-six-page ruling denying Honken's post-trial motions on all grounds. See United States v. Honken, 381 F.Supp.2d 936 (N.D.Iowa 2005) (ruling on defendant's post-trial motions for judgment of acquittal or new trial, including ruling on allegations of juro......
-
Honken v. United States, Nos. CV10–3074–LRR
...judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, for a new trial (criminal docket nos. 693, 695). See generally United States v. Honken, 381 F.Supp.2d 936 (N.D.Iowa 2005). Before doing so, the trial court addressed multiple claims, including, but not limited to, the following: prohibition agai......
Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
-
United States v. Johnson, No. CR 01–3046–MWB.
...the principal in the murders, he received the death penalty only for the murders of the children. See, e.g., United States v. Honken, 381 F.Supp.2d 936 (N.D.Iowa 2005) (denying Honken's post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial). The jury in Johnson's case also convicted her ......
-
United States v. Johnson, No. CR 01-3046-MWB
...the principal in the murders, he received the death penalty only for the murders of the children. See, e.g., United States v. Honken, 381 F. Supp. 2d 936 (N.D. Iowa 2005) (denying Honken's post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial). The jury in Johnson's case also convicted h......
-
Johnson v. United States, No. C 09-3064-MWB
...(N.D. Iowa 2005) (297 page (175 page printed) opinion denying the defendant's request for post-trial relief); United States v. Honken, 381 F. Supp. 2d 936 (N.D. Iowa 2005) (206 page (128 page printed) denying the defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial). 3.The level of dys......
-
U.S. v. Johnson, No. CR 01-3046-MWB.
...trial, the court entered a two-hundred-six-page ruling denying Honken's post-trial motions on all grounds. See United States v. Honken, 381 F.Supp.2d 936 (N.D.Iowa 2005) (ruling on defendant's post-trial motions for judgment of acquittal or new trial, including ruling on allegations of juro......
Request a trial to view additional results