ROMINGER LEGAL
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions - 5th Circuit
Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS
NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE
This opinion or court case is from the Fifth Circuit Court or Appeals. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH
COURT REPORTERS
PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS
PROCESS SERVERS
DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS
EXPERT WITNESSES

 

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

 
Web Rominger Legal

Legal News - Legal Headlines

 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-60428
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff ­ Appellee,
versus
DONALD KEITH BURTON,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
March 12, 2003
Before BENAVIDES, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
CARL E. STEWART, Circuit Judge:
A jury found Donald Keith Burton ("Burton") guilty of carjacking, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 2119 (count one), possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) (count two), and brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (count three). After he was sentenced, Burton timely
appealed claiming that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his convictions as charged. We agree.
For the reasons that follow, we REVERSE all three of Burton's convictions and VACATE his
sentence.

1.
Standard of Review
We review an insufficiency of the evidence claim in the light most favorable to the
Government. United States v. Quiroz-Hernandez, 48 F.3d 858, 865 (5th Cir. 1995). Because Burton
failed to renew his motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the trial, we review his claim to
determine "whether there was a manifest miscarriage of justice." United States v Galvan, 949 F.2d
777, 783 (5th Cir. 1991). "That occurs only where `the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt
or contains evidence on a key element of the offense [that is] so tenuous that a conviction would be
shocking.' " United States v. McIntosh, 280 F.3d 479, 483 (5th Cir. 2002) (quoting United States
v. Cathey, 259 F.3d 365, 368 (5th Cir. 2001) (internal citations omitted; brackets in original)).
2.
Analysis
Burton challenges his conviction on counts one and two asserting that the Government failed to
prove a nexus to interstate commerce, an essential element of both crimes. Specifically, Burton argues
that the Government failed to prove that the vehicle involved in the carjacking, and that the firearm
he possessed had been transported in interstate commerce. In addition, Burton challenges his
conviction on count three, brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, because the Government
failed to prove an essential element of the predicate crime of violence ­ the carjacking. The
Government concedes that it failed to prove that the firearm involved traveled in interstate commerce
and agrees that Burton's conviction should be set aside as to count two. Thus, the only issue before
us is whether the evidence is sufficient to support Burton's convictions on counts one and three.
Burton argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his carjacking conviction because
the Government failed to offer evidence that the vehicle involved, a Nissan Maxima, traveled in
interstate commerce. The Government asserts that although it failed to offer evidence of interstate
2

travel, it was within the "common knowledge" of the jury that no Nissan Maximas were manufactured
in Mississippi prior to the date of the carjacking. The Government offers only speculation to support
this contention.
We have acknowledged that juries can use common knowledge when considering evidence. See
United States v. Fores-Chapa, 48 F.3d 156, 161 (5th Cir. 1995). Nonet heless, because the
Government's evidence was too attenuated to find the Defendant convicted as charged, we
determined that "but for the government's misconduct in [the] trial Appellant would never have been
convicted," and reversed the conviction. 48 F.3d at 163. Similar to Flores-Chapa, in the present case,
but for the Government's acknowledged oversight in this trial, Burton would never have been
convicted. See id. The evidence here is not merely too attenuated to find Burton convicted as
charged, but rather, it is worse -- there is a total absence of evidence to support the interstate
commerce element. The Government failed to make a persuasive showing that the presence or
absence of a Nissan manufacturer in Mississippi was a matter of common knowledge of jurors in
Mississippi. Because the Government presented no evidence whatsoever that the Nissan traveled in
interstate commerce, a key element of the crime, we conclude that Burton's conviction for count one
amounts to a "manifest miscarriage of justice."
As there is insufficient evidence to sustain Burton's conviction of carjacking, Burton's conviction
for brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, as alleged in count three of his indictment must
necessarily be reversed for failing to prove the predicate crime of violence, namely carjacking.
1. Conclusion
3

Burton's convictions for carjacking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2119 (count one), possession of
a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) (count two), and
brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (count
three) are REVERSED and Burton's corresponding sentences are VACATED. Accordi ngly, we
REMAND to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSE, VACATE, and REMAND.
4

Ask a Lawyer

 

 

FREE CASE REVIEW BY A LOCAL LAWYER!
|
|
\/

Personal Injury Law
Accidents
Dog Bite
Legal Malpractice
Medical Malpractice
Other Professional Malpractice
Libel & Slander
Product Liability
Slip & Fall
Torts
Workplace Injury
Wrongful Death
Auto Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bankruptcy
Chapter 7
Chapter 11
Business/Corporate Law
Business Formation
Business Planning
Franchising
Tax Planning
Traffic/Transportation Law
Moving Violations
Routine Infractions
Lemon Law
Manufacturer Defects
Securities Law
Securities Litigation
Shareholder Disputes
Insider Trading
Foreign Investment
Wills & Estates

Wills

Trusts
Estate Planning
Family Law
Adoption
Child Abuse
Child Custody
Child Support
Divorce - Contested
Divorce - Uncontested
Juvenile Criminal Law
Premarital Agreements
Spousal Support
Labor/Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Sexual Harassment
Age Discrimination
Workers Compensation
Real Estate/Property Law
Condemnation / Eminent Domain
Broker Litigation
Title Litigation
Landlord/Tenant
Buying/Selling/Leasing
Foreclosures
Residential Real Estate Litigation
Commercial Real Estate Litigation
Construction Litigation
Banking/Finance Law
Debtor/Creditor
Consumer Protection
Venture Capital
Constitutional Law
Discrimination
Police Misconduct
Sexual Harassment
Privacy Rights
Criminal Law
DUI / DWI / DOI
Assault & Battery
White Collar Crimes
Sex Crimes
Homocide Defense
Civil Law
Insurance Bad Faith
Civil Rights
Contracts
Estate Planning, Wills & Trusts
Litigation/Trials
Social Security
Worker's Compensation
Probate, Will & Trusts
Intellectual Property
Patents
Trademarks
Copyrights
Tax Law
IRS Disputes
Filing/Compliance
Tax Planning
Tax Power of Attorney
Health Care Law
Disability
Elder Law
Government/Specialty Law
Immigration
Education
Trade Law
Agricultural/Environmental
IRS Issues

 


Google
Search Rominger Legal


 


LEGAL HELP FORUM - Potential Client ? Post your question.
LEGAL HELP FORUM - Attorney? Answer Questions, Maybe get hired!

NOW - CASE LAW - All 50 States - Federal Courts - Try it for FREE


 


Get Legal News
Enter your Email


Preview

We now have full text legal news
drawn from all the major sources!!

ADD A SEARCH ENGINE TO YOUR PAGE!!!

TELL A FRIEND ABOUT ROMINGER LEGAL

Ask Your Legal Question Now.

Pennsylvania Lawyer Help Board

Find An Attorney

TERMS OF USE - DISCLAIMER - LINKING POLICIES

Created and Developed by
Rominger Legal
Copyright 1997 - 2010.

A Division of
ROMINGER, INC.