U.S. v. Reed, No. 94-5164

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges, and BROWN; WESLEY E. BROWN
Citation61 F.3d 803
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dwight REED, Defendant-Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 94-5164
Decision Date31 July 1995

Page 803

61 F.3d 803
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Dwight REED, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 94-5164.
United States Court of Appeals,
Tenth Circuit.
July 31, 1995.

Stephen J. Knorr, Federal Public Defender, and Stephen J. Greubel, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Tulsa, OK, for appellant Dwight Reed.

Stephen C. Lewis, U.S. Atty., (Thomas Scott Woodward, Asst. U.S. Atty., with him on the brief), Tulsa, OK, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges, and BROWN, Senior District Judge. **

WESLEY E. BROWN, Senior District Judge.

The appellant Dwight Reed was convicted of possessing a firearm after a former conviction of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). He appeals that conviction, presenting the sole issue of whether the trial court erred by giving the jury an Allen charge after the jury announced it was unable to reach a verdict.

After reviewing the pleadings, trial transcript, and briefs, we conclude that the Allen instruction was appropriate under the circumstances of Mr. Reed's trial and affirm the judgment.

There is no dispute concerning the facts surrounding appellant's arrest and prosecution, and the case was presented to the jury upon the testimony of only three witnesses--two for the prosecution and one for the defense. The entire case took less than two hours to complete. 1

Officer Lori Visser of the Tulsa Police Department testified that she was called to the scene of a domestic dispute at 10:00 p.m., July 2, 1993. When she and another officer Howard Goad arrived at the scene, the front yard of a private home, they found three males and one female. The three men were arguing over the woman and one, a Mr. Crawford, was wielding a baseball bat. Appellant and the other man were entering Mr. Reed's vehicle which was parked in the driveway of the residence at the time the officers arrived. Crawford told them that appellant had a gun, and appellant gave his consent for search of his vehicle. The firearm, a Smith & Wesson 9 millimeter semi-automatic pistol, and several rounds of ammunition were

Page 804

found beneath the driver's seat of appellant's vehicle.

Officer Howard Goad testified then when he arrived at the scene he saw two males coming from the house "in kind of a fast paced run" to a Jeep Cherokee that was parked in the driveway and that he pulled his vehicle up behind the Jeep to keep them from leaving the area. The man with the baseball bat in his hand told Goad that appellant had threatened him with a gun and, after the firearm was discovered, appellant was arrested. Goad further testified that after reading of Miranda rights, appellant told him that "he needed to carry a gun because people were shooting at him all the time." (Vol III Record, Transcript p. 23).

After Visser and Goad testified, Felecia Davis (the lady at the center of the controversy) was called as a witness for the defense. She testified that she had been out with appellant Reed that evening and that her boyfriend Rick Crawford became angry because she had another friend. Ms. Davis testified that Reed never told her that he had a weapon, that she did not tell Officer Visser that he had a weapon, and that she did not see the firearm in question until it was discovered in Reed's vehicle. 2

After the testimony of the three witnesses was presented, jury instructions were read without objection from either side; and the jury retired at 2:10 p.m. Two hours later, the jury returned with a note which read: "We are unable to reach a unanimous decision. No one has changed their position since 2 p.m. What happens if we stay this way?" The court discussed with counsel the possibility of using an Allen instruction but elected to dismiss the jury for the evening with a direction that they return in the morning for further deliberations. 3

The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • State v. O'NEIL, (SC 16177)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • July 23, 2002
    ...117 S. Ct. 499, 136 L. Ed. 2d 390 (1996); United States v. Arney, 248 F.3d 984, 987-90 and n.3 (10th Cir. 2001); United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803, 805 and n.5 (10th Cir. 1995); United States v. Butler, 904 F.2d 1482, 1487-88 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Smith, 857 F.2d 682, 684 (10t......
  • U.S. v. Ailsworth, No. 94-40017-01-SAC.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • November 18, 1996
    ...on the undecided counts. Over the defendant's objection, the court then gave the jury an Allen3 instruction. See United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803 (10th Cir.1995); United States v. Burch, 928 F.Supp. 1066 (D.Kan.1996) (over defendant's objection, this court gives the jury an Allen instruct......
  • United States v. Cornelius, Nos. 10–3125
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • September 18, 2012
    ...instructions, it is not a per se rule.” United States v. McKinney, 822 F.2d 946, 951 (10th Cir.1987); see also United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803, 805 (10th Cir.1995). Indeed, “where the trial court administered a supplemental Allen instruction only after the jury informed the court that it......
  • State v. Harry, No. 20070025-CA.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Utah
    • June 12, 2008
    ...by the Tenth Circuit in the face of federal constitutional challenges like those asserted by Harry. See, e.g., United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803, 805 & n. 5 (10th Cir.1995) ("`[T]here is no reason to believe that ... more or clearer evidence could be produced.'"); United States v. Butler, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • United States v. Cornelius, Nos. 10–3125
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • September 18, 2012
    ...instructions, it is not a per se rule.” United States v. McKinney, 822 F.2d 946, 951 (10th Cir.1987); see also United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803, 805 (10th Cir.1995). Indeed, “where the trial court administered a supplemental Allen instruction only after the jury informed the court that it......
  • State v. O'NEIL, (SC 16177)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • July 23, 2002
    ...117 S. Ct. 499, 136 L. Ed. 2d 390 (1996); United States v. Arney, 248 F.3d 984, 987-90 and n.3 (10th Cir. 2001); United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803, 805 and n.5 (10th Cir. 1995); United States v. Butler, 904 F.2d 1482, 1487-88 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Smith, 857 F.2d 682, 684 (10t......
  • U.S. v. Ailsworth, No. 94-40017-01-SAC.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • November 18, 1996
    ...on the undecided counts. Over the defendant's objection, the court then gave the jury an Allen3 instruction. See United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803 (10th Cir.1995); United States v. Burch, 928 F.Supp. 1066 (D.Kan.1996) (over defendant's objection, this court gives the jury an Allen instruct......
  • State v. Harry, No. 20070025-CA.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Utah
    • June 12, 2008
    ...by the Tenth Circuit in the face of federal constitutional challenges like those asserted by Harry. See, e.g., United States v. Reed, 61 F.3d 803, 805 & n. 5 (10th Cir.1995) ("`[T]here is no reason to believe that ... more or clearer evidence could be produced.'"); United States v. Butler, ......
  • 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