United States v. Porter

Decision Date28 June 2019
Docket NumberNos. 18-4081,18-4099,s. 18-4081
Citation928 F.3d 947
Parties UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. Mark Olic PORTER, Defendant - Appellant/Cross-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

Daphne Oberg, Assistant Federal Public Defender (Kathryn N. Nester, Federal Public Defender; Scott Keith Wilson and Bretta Pirie, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, District of Utah, on the briefs), Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Defendant - Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

Max Lapertosa, Attorney (Eric S. Dreiband, Assistant Attorney General; Erin H. Flynn, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, with him on the brief), Washington, D.C. for the Plaintiff - Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Before MATHESON, EBEL, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

MATHESON, Circuit Judge.

Mark Olic Porter shouted racial epithets at Lucas Waldvogel, a seven-year-old African American who lived in Mr. Porter's apartment complex. After hearing Mr. Porter's language, the boy's father, Michael Waldvogel, confronted Mr. Porter, who then assaulted Mr. Waldvogel with a stun cane. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Waldvogel and his family moved out of the complex.

A jury convicted Mr. Porter of interfering with Mr. Waldvogel's housing because of Mr. Waldvogel's race, a violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3631. The district court sentenced Mr. Porter to nine months in prison. He appeals his conviction. The Government cross-appeals his sentence.

On direct appeal, Mr. Porter first argues the evidence was insufficient to show he assaulted Mr. Waldvogel because of his race. Based on our review of the trial evidence, we disagree and hold that a reasonable jury could find Mr. Porter guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Porter also argues the district court plainly erred by allowing the prosecution's opening statement and closing arguments, the trial evidence, and the jury instructions to make it likely that the jury convicted him for his actions against Lucas rather than Michael Waldvogel, thereby constructively amending the indictment. We disagree and hold that the presentations at trial clearly identified Michael Waldvogel as the alleged victim.

On cross-appeal, the Government argues procedural sentencing error. It first argues the district court miscalculated the advisory sentencing range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("U.S.S.G." or "Guidelines") because the evidence showed that Mr. Porter committed an aggravated assault rather than a simple assault against Mr. Waldvogel. We disagree, holding the district court's implicit finding that Mr. Porter did not intend to inflict bodily harm was not clearly erroneous. The Government alternatively argues the district court erred when it failed to apply a base level of 10 under the applicable sentencing Guideline when Mr. Porter's offense involved "the use or threat of force against a person." We agree with the alternative argument and hold the district court erred in calculating Mr. Porter's sentence.

Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(b), we affirm Mr. Porter's conviction and remand for resentencing.

I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background1
1. The Incident

The assault occurred at the Adagio Apartments in Draper, Utah, where both men lived in 2016. Mr. Waldvogel and his neighbor, Kaitlin Adair, described the incident at trial.

On November 3, 2016, Ms. Adair returned home from work and saw Mr. Porter on his front patio. He spoke to her, first making small talk and then "talking about immigration." Record on Appeal ("ROA"), Vol. V at 246. Ms. Adair testified: "I don't remember specifically everything that he said, but I remember him saying that we need to exterminate all of the motherfucking niggers, but first we need to exterminate all the motherfucking nigger lovers." Id.2

During this conversation, seven-year-old Lucas Waldvogel, who is African American, was riding his scooter on the sidewalk within view of Mr. Porter's patio. Ms. Adair noticed that Mr. Porter's attitude changed when he saw Lucas: "He seemed to get more agitated. His volume seemed to increase. It seemed like he was getting louder because the boy was out there." Id. at 248. Ms. Adair withdrew from the conversation and considered calling the police. She did not do so.

Lucas went inside and informed his father "that there was a man outside shouting at him." Id. at 175. Mr. Waldvogel told Lucas to go back outside. When Lucas returned with the same complaint, Mr. Waldvogel went to the balcony of his apartment to see what was happening. He heard Mr. Porter say to Lucas, "[G]et out of here, nigger." Id. at 177.

Mr. Waldvogel ran outside toward Mr. Porter's apartment. As he approached, Ms. Adair summoned him. She warned him that Mr. Porter "ha[d] been saying some pretty crazy things out here while your boy has been out here." Id. at 250. She urged Mr. Waldvogel to "be cautious, because it looked like [Mr. Porter] had been drinking." Id. She recalled that during this interaction, Mr. Waldvogel "didn't seem threatening" and "didn't make [her] feel nervous." Id.

She also explained:

A. It didn't seem like Mr. Porter had great judgment at the time with everything that was going on and Mr. Waldvogel, I am not sure of his race or ethnicity, but he didn't look white, and so I was concerned that that might cause a problem.
Q. When you say cause a problem, do you mean for the defendant?
A. For Mr. Waldvogel.
Q. Explain why.
A. I was not sure if Mr. Porter would lash out or if he would be violent. With how he was acting, I believe that he might, that it might take that turn.
Q. That is what you were trying to communicate to Mr. Waldvogel?
A. Yes.

Id. at 251.

Mr. Waldvogel retrieved Lucas, and they began walking toward their apartment. As they passed Mr. Porter's patio, Mr. Porter came outside. Mr. Waldvogel approached the patio and said "something to the effect of ... I don't care what you're saying in your house, but, you know, don't yell that stuff at my son." Id. at 180-81. Mr. Porter responded, "[Y]ou and your nigger son can get out of here." Id. at 181.

During this interaction, Mr. Porter was holding a stun cane in his hand near his right leg. The cane included a flashlight and a small barbed part on the end that, when activated, would send an electric shock into anything it touched. Mr. Waldvogel testified, "[T]he next thing I remember was hearing the arcing of a device as it came over this side of my head and then it hit me on my neck." Id. at 182. The cane "pretty much incapacitated" Mr. Waldvogel, who fell to the ground. Id. at 183. Mr. Waldvogel then grabbed the stun cane and pulled it away from Mr. Porter. Mr. Waldvogel fell backward into the grass, and the stun cane broke. Ms. Adair testified that, during this encounter, Lucas "stayed away," id. at 252, and remained "far off on kind of the other side of the grassy area," id. at 251.

Mr. Porter announced he was going to call the police because Mr. Waldvogel had stolen his property. Mr. Waldvogel responded that he intended to call the police, and, after discarding the broken stun cane and walking back to his apartment, he did. Mr. Waldvogel next saw Mr. Porter leave the apartment complex in his car.

While Mr. Porter was away, three Draper Police Department officers responded to Mr. Waldvogel's call. They examined and photographed Mr. Waldvogel's neck, which had a small red mark, and asked whether Mr. Waldvogel needed medical attention. He declined. The Government introduced a picture of Mr. Waldvogel's neck at trial.

When Mr. Porter returned to the Adagio, the police arrested him. Mr. Waldvogel recounted that, during the arrest, Mr. Porter "was telling all the officers to F off. He called the officers nigger lovers and a lot of F bombs." Id. at 193.

Mr. Waldvogel testified that the altercation deeply affected Lucas. In the ensuing weeks, Lucas slept in Mr. Waldvogel's bed and insisted that Mr. Waldvogel block the front door with a large elliptical exercise machine. Lucas also stopped playing outside and would no longer retrieve the mail with his father. As a result, Mr. Waldvogel asked for and received permission to terminate his lease and move away from the Adagio. He eventually moved away from Draper because he feared running into Mr. Porter.

2. Mr. Porter's Animosity Toward African Americans

As conceded in his brief and as the evidence confirmed, Mr. Porter holds racist views. See Porter Opening Br. at 2, 11.

When Mr. Porter moved to the Adagio Apartments in 2016, he asked the leasing agent how many African Americans lived there. After he moved in, Mr. Porter told Adagio maintenance worker Tyler Young, who was working on a vacant apartment above Mr. Porter's apartment, "not to move any niggers in above him." ROA, Vol. V at 130. On another occasion, while fixing Mr. Porter's water heater, Mr. Young overheard Mr. Porter deliver a parody of Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, offering his own dream "that all niggers were dead." Id. at 132.

Ms. Adair said that Mr. Porter told her he was "concerned" that the paperboy, who was African American, would break into his apartment. Id. at 245. She also stated, "The way [Mr. Porter] spoke about immigration led me to believe that he didn't like Mexicans or South Americans maybe." Id. She added, "He didn't like black people." Id.

Mr. Porter also demonstrated his racial animus in his comments to Ms. Adair immediately before the assault, to the Draper Police shortly after the assault, and later to the FBI when he was arrested the second time.

3. The FBI's Arrest of Mr. Porter

Mr. Porter was released after his initial arrest. Shortly thereafter, the Adagio evicted him, and he moved to Arizona. In 2017, nearly a year after the incident, FBI agents arrested Mr. Porter at his new home in Arizona and recorded their interviews with him. In one of these recordings, Mr. Porter recounted his version of the incident and admitted that he had told Lucas, "Get out of here you little stinking nigger." ROA, Vol. III, Exh. 6-3 at 0:38-56.

In another...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • United States v. Wyatt
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 10 Julio 2020
    ...instructed, could find that Wyatt and his co-conspirators knew that what they agreed to do was unlawful. See United States v. Porter, 928 F.3d 947, 957 (10th Cir. 2019) (stating, in assessing sufficiency of the evidence on the question of whether the defendant acted with the required racial......
  • Kim v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. (In re Kim)
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 28 Abril 2020
    ...that Chase maintained possession (and, therefore, the right to enforce the Note) when the Note was lost. See United States v. Porter, 928 F.3d 947, 962 (10th Cir. 2019) ("Under clear error review, we 'view the evidence and inferences drawn therefrom in the light most favorable to the [bankr......
  • United States v. Torres
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 23 Agosto 2019
    ...and that the court's use of the unadorned word "nervousness" was merelyshorthand for unusual nervousness. Cf. United States v. Porter, 928 F.3d 947, 965 (10th Cir. 2019) ("Whether the district court should have used aggravated assault as the 'underlying offense' under § 2H1.1(a) therefore t......
  • United States v. Jones
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 29 Septiembre 2021
    ... ... States v. Sanchez-Leon, 764 F.3d 1248, 1262 (10th Cir ... 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted) "If we find a ... procedural error, resentencing is required only if the error ... was not harmless." United States v. Porter, 928 ... F.3d 947, 963 (10th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks ... omitted). "Procedural error is harmless if the record ... viewed as a whole clearly indicates the district court would ... have imposed the same sentence had it not relied on the ... procedural ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Sentencing
    • United States
    • Georgetown Law Journal No. 110-Annual Review, August 2022
    • 1 Agosto 2022
    ...620 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2010) (hate crime enhancement applied because defendant attacked victim based on race); U.S. v. Porter, 928 F.3d 947, 964 (10th Cir. 2019) (same). However, the hate crime enhancement does not apply on the basis of gender for sexual offenses because this factor ......
  • Review Proceedings
    • United States
    • Georgetown Law Journal No. 110-Annual Review, August 2022
    • 1 Agosto 2022
    ...calculation of Guidelines range not harmless because unclear proper calculation would have resulted in same sentence); U.S. v. Porter, 928 F.3d 947, 968 (10th Cir. 2019) (district court’s improper calculation of offense level not harmless because no evidence court would have given same sent......

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