Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-05103/USCOURTS-ca10-90-05103-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Floyd Lee Wood
Appellant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

FILED 

Uoited Scates Courc of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

MAY 2 0 1991 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

FLOYD LEE WOOD, ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellant. ) 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

BOBBY F. HENNING, JR., ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellant. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 90-5103 

(D.C. No. 89-CR-89-B) 

(N.D. Oklahoma) 

No. 90-5104 

(D.C. No. 89-CR-89-B) 

(N.D. Oklahoma) 

Before MCKAY and LOGAN, Circuit Judges, and BRIMMER, District 

Judge.** 

Defendants Floyd Lee Wood and Bobby F. Henning, Jr. appeal 

their convictions, and Wood appeals his sentence, for conspiracy 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

** The Honorable Clarence A. Brimmer, Chief Judge, United States 

District Court for the District of Wyoming, sitting by designation. 

Appellate Case: 90-5103 Document: 010110106546 Date Filed: 05/20/1991 Page: 1 
.. 

to commit mail fraud, in violation of 18 u.s.c. § 371. Henning 

was convicted of additional counts arising out of separate mailings made in connection with the same scheme. Both defendants 

contend on appeal that the district court erred in granting the 

jury's request to have the testimony of prosecution witness 

Kimberly Hill read to it after the jury had begun deliberating on 

the case. Wood also contends that the court erred in finding that 

he obstructed justice, making a two level upward adjustment in his 

offense level. 

The indictment charged, and the jury found, that defendants 

entered a conspiracy to acquire a house and property in Oklahoma, 

to obtain insurance on the house and its contents, to cause the 

house to be destroyed by fire, and to submit insurance claims 

based on destruction of the house with the proceeds and benefits 

therefrom to be distributed to Henning, Wood, and Wood's son, 

Rocky Dean Wood. Rocky Dean Wood became a cooperating witness for 

the government and testified as to the details of the scheme and 

how it was carried out. His testimony was corroborated by 

Kimberly Hill, who asserted that she was present at some of the 

conversations. Defendants Floyd Wood and Henning both testified 

in a manner that contradicted the testimony of Rocky Wood and 

Kimberly Hill. 

After the jury began its deliberation, it asked the court to 

hear Hill's testimony again. The court advised the jury, in writing, that there was no transcript of her testimony and the only 

way the jury could hear it would be for the reporter to read it 

back from her notes. Thereafter the jury sent out another note 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-5103 Document: 010110106546 Date Filed: 05/20/1991 Page: 2 
asking to have the court reporter read back the Hill testimony. 

Over objection by defendants, the court had Ms. Hill's testimony 

read to the jury in its entirety. 

On appeal we review for abuse of discretion. See, ~, 

United States v. Keys, 899 F.2d 983, 988 (10th Cir.), cert. 

denied, 111 S. Ct. 160 (1990). Defendants contend that the reading placed undue emphasis on Hill's testimony. They recite a 

general rule that reading of testimony after a jury commences its 

deliberations is disfavored, although they acknowledge that in 

cases such as Keys we have held that a court did not abuse its 

discretion in permitting witnesses' testimony to be read to a jury 

after it had begun its deliberations. Defendants attempt to 

distinguish Keys and other cases relied upon by the government. 

The government argues that there are several reasons why the 

jury may have wanted the evidence repeated, including the very 

soft voice in which Hill allegedly testified. The government 

points out that the court had the entire testimony read, which did 

not unduly emphasize only a portion of it. The government also 

notes the court's cautious approach to the jury's request; the 

court stated that the reporter could not give the voice inflections and demeanor and that the jury should not overemphasize the 

testimony of only one witness. Defendants agree that the court 

took the precautions noted by the government, but they argue that 

these precautions are not enough. 

On review of the record and analysis of the cases relied upon 

by the parties, we cannot find that the court abused its discretion in permitting the testimony to be read, and we cannot find 

-3-

Appellate Case: 90-5103 Document: 010110106546 Date Filed: 05/20/1991 Page: 3 
that either of the defendants was unduly prejudiced by the court 

acceding to the jury's request. 

With respect to defendant Wood's challenge of the trial 

court's assessment of a two level increase for obstruction of 

justice, we have previously considered cases very like the one at 

issue here, in which a defendant took the stand and told a story 

contrary to that of the government witnesses, and one which the 

jury and the judge obviously disbelieved. See Keys, 899 F.2d at 

988-89; United States v. Beaulieu, 900 F.2d 1537 (10th Cir.), 

cert. denied, 110 s. Ct. 3352 (1990). We cannot meaningfully 

distinguish those cases, and hence we uphold the district court's 

action as being within the letter and spirit of the sentencing 

guidelines. 

AFFIRMED. 

-4-

Entered for the Court 

James K. Logan 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-5103 Document: 010110106546 Date Filed: 05/20/1991 Page: 4