FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT JAN 11, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 14388

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 04 -000 20 -C R -H L -7 U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s T R E L L I N Y T . T U RN E R , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e M id d le D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( Jan u ar y 11, 2007) B efo re C A RN E S , M A R C U S an d K R A V IT C H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M A R C U S , C i rc ui tJudg e: T r e l l i ny T . T urne rappe a l s he rc onvi c t i ons a nd 240- m onth s e nt e nc e f or m ul t i pl e of

f e ns e s a r i s i ng outof

he rr ol e i n the the f

tof appr oxi m a t e l y $266, 0002

f r o m a U .S . P o s t O f

f ic e in V a ld o s ta , G e o r g ia o n S e p te m b e r3 , 2 0 0 4 . O n ap p e a l, T u rn e ra r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d b y a d m ittin g h e a r s a y te s tim o n y , in vi ol at i on of B rut on v. U ni t ed S t at es , 39 1 U . S . 12 3 (19 68 ), and t hather s ent ence , w h ic h w a s a b o v e th e S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s a d v is o ry r a n g e , w a s u n r e a s o n a b le . A f te rth o r o u g h r e v ie w , w e a f f ir m . I . T h e p r o c e d u r a l h i s t o ry a n d r e l e v a n tf a c t s a d d u c e d a ttr i a l a r e th e s e . On F ebruary17 , 20 05 , T urner and tw o co-defendant s - - W i l l i am B roxt on (“ B roxt on ”) , w h o w a s T u rn e r ’s liv e - in b o y f r ie n d a n d th e f

a th e ro f h e ry o u n g e s t c h ild , a n d h is u n c le , R o b e r t B r o x to n - - w e r e c h a r g e d in a m u lti- c o u n t s u p e r s e d in g in d ic tm e n t. T u rn e rw a s c h a r g e d w ith th e f o llo w in g c r im e s : c o n s p ir in g to s te a l U .S . M a il, in vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . §§ 371, 1708 ( C ountO ne ) ; the f tof U . S . M a i l , i n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . § 1708 ( C ountT w o) ; i nt e r s t a t e tr a ns por t a t i on of s t ol e n c a s h f

r om V a l dos t a , G e or gi a , t o N e w a r k, N e w J e r s e y , i n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . § 2314 ( C o u n t T h r e e ) ; e n g a g in g in c o n d u c t m is le a d in g to a la w e n f o r c e m e n t o f

f ic e rw ith the i nt e ntt o hi nde r , de l a y , orpr e ve ntc om m uni c a t i on of i nf or m a t i on r e l a t i ng t o the c om m i s s i on of

a f e de r a l of f e ns e , i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . § 1512( b) ( 3) ( C ount S i x) ; a nd tw o c ount s of

m one y l a unde r i ng, one a r i s i ng outof the us e of

pr oc e e ds of the the f tt o pur c ha s e a F or d E xpl or e r( C ountS e ve n) , a nd the othe ra r i s i ng outofBrox ton also was cha rg ed in Counts One, Two, Three, Seven, and Eight, and was 1 charg ed alonein Count Four, possession of a f irea rm by a convic ted felon; Count Five, the making of mis le a dingstate ments to l aw enf orc e ment; and

CountsNineand

Ten, po sse ssi on

wi th intent to distribute crack coc aine. Rober t Broxton also was charg ed in Counts One, Two, Three, a nd Seven. Robert B roxt on was a

fug itive at the time of trial. Hewas a rre sted on Februar

y 16, 2 20 06 . H eple d guilty

to C ount O neand

wa s sentenc e d toa

60 -m onth t e rm

of imp ri so nment. 3 th e u s e o f

p r o c e e d s o f

th e th e f t to p u r c h a s e a C h e v y S u b u rb a n ( C o u n t E ig h t) , b o th i n v i ol at i on of 18 U . S . C . § 1 95 7. T urner a nd W i l l i am B roxt on w er e tri ed t og ether, 1 a f t e rw hi c h T urne rw a s c onvi c t e d by the j ury of C ount s O ne thr ough T hr e e , S i x, a nd E i ght , buta c qui tt e d on C ountS e ve n, a nd W i l l i a m B r oxt on w a s c onvi c t e d of C ount s O ne thr ough F i ve a nd C ount s S e ve n thr ough T e n. 2 A ttri al , th e g o v ern m en ti n tro d u ced th e t est i m o n y o f o v er fo rty w i tn esses, pr i m a r i l y c ons i s t i ng of

l a w e nf or c e m e ntof

f i c e r s , T ur ne r ’ s c o- w or ke r s , a nd s a le s p e r s o n s f

r o m w h o m T u rn e ro rB r o x to n , o rb o th , h a d p u r c h a s e d g o o d s w ith l arg e su m s o f cash i n th e w eek s fo l l o w i n g th e th eft . T h e g o v ern m en tal so p r e s e n te d th e te s tim o n y o f tw o w itn e s s e s to w h o m B r o x to n h a d m a d e s ta te m e n ts adm i tt i ng hi s i nv ol vem enti n the theft . D uri ng the di re ctt es t i m on y of bot h, they r e c ount e d t o the j ury e xtr a j udi c i a l s t a t e m e nt s i n w hi c h B r oxt on i nc r i m i na t e d not o n ly h im s e lf

, b u t a ls o T u rn e r , th e r e b y g iv in g r is e to th e s u b s ta n tia l B ru to n c la im w h ic h f o r m s th e m a in is s u e o n ap p e a l. T h e g o v e rn m e n t’s e v id e n c e e s tab lis h e d th e f o llo w in g . A t ap p r o x im a te ly 9 :5 5 p .m . o n F r id a y , S e p te m b e r3 , 2 0 0 4 , tw o p e o p le e n te r e d a U .S . P o s t O f f ic e in4

V a l dos t a , G e or gi a . A ttha tt i m e , the r e w a s onl y one c l e r k on duty , L a rry T e m pl i n, w ho r e c e nt l y ha d unde r gone e y e s ur ge ry , w a s e l de r l y , a nd othe rw i s e di d notha ve g o o d e y e s ig h t. T e m p lin o b s e r v e d o n e o f th e in d iv id u a ls e n te rth e “r e g is try c a g e ,” w hi ch i s al ocked areaencl osed i n w i re -m es h, w here re gi st er ed m ai l and o ther v a lu a b le ite m s a r e s e c u r e d , w h ile th e o th e rin d iv id u a l s to o d o u ts id e o f th e c a g e . T e m pl i n i m m e di a t e l y e xi t e d the pos tof f i c e a nd c a l l e d the pol i c e , butc oul d not p ro v i d e a m ean i n g fu l d escri p t i o n o f th e tw o i n d i v i d u al s. B y the t i m e the po l i ce arri ved, the suspec t s w er e gon e. T he offi ce rs di s c ove r e d tha ta r e a rdoori nt o the f a c i l i ty w a s uns e c ur e d, butthe r e w a s no s i gn of a f orce d ent ry . T hu s, fr om the st art , the po l i ce vi ew ed the cr i m e a s a n “ i nsi de j ob . ” T he uns e c ur e d r e a rdoorl e d f r om a m e n’ s r e s tr oom i nt o the pos t a l f a c i l i ty . T he restro o m al so h ad an ex t eri o r d o o r t o th e o u t si d e l o ad i n g d o ck b eh i n d th e p o st o f f ic e , a s w e ll a s a n in te r io rd o o rw h ic h p r o v id e d a c c e s s f r o m th e b a th r o o m in to the r e s tof

the f a c i l i ty , a nd, m os ti m m e di a t e l y , i nt o a n e m pl oy e e br e a kr oom . T he e xt e r i ordoorw a s a l w a y s ke ptunl oc ke d s o tha tthe r e s tr oom c oul d be us e d by pos t a l - truc k dr i ve r s w ho s t oppe d a tthe f a c i l i ty ’ s l oa di ng doc k f

orpi c kups a nd de l i ve r i e s . N ot a bl y , the i nt e r i ordoorha d a pus h- butt on c om bi na t i on l oc k, a nd the d o o rw a s k e p t c lo s e d a n d lo c k e d w h e n n o t in im m e d ia te u s e .5

A cc ordi ng t o T em pl i n, the three -di gi tcode w as w i del y kno w n b y post al e m pl oy e e s w ho ha d us e d tha tba thr oom ortha te ntr a nc e t o ga i n e ntry i nt o the fa ci l i ty. Indeed, the go vernm entpres ent ed the t es t i m on y of num er ou s c o-w orkers w ho al so t es t i fi ed thatthe com bi nat i on w as com m on kn ow l edge am on g the po st al e m p lo y e e s . L in d a K a th le e n C o m b s , a d is tr ib u tio n c le r k w h o w o r k e d th e s h if t w ith T urne rbe gi nni ng a t11: 00 p. m . on the ni ghtof the the f t , t e s t i f i e d tha tdur i ng the s hi f t , T urne rappe a r e d ne r vous a nd a s ke d C om bs a n unus ua l s e r i e s of que s t i ons s uc h a s w ha tthe pos t a l i ns pe c t or s ’ s uc c e s s r a t e w a s i n s ol vi ng s uc h c a s e s , a nd w he the rthe i ns pe c t or s c oul d a c c e s s ba nk a c c ount s a nd f i na nc i a l r e c or ds i n the c our s e of the i ri nve s t i ga t i on. C om bs a l s o t e s t i f i e d tha te ve ry one kne w the c om bi na t i on t o ope n the i nt e r i ordoor . A f e w da y s a f

t e rthe the f

t , C om bs a nd se vera l co-w orkers , i ncl ud i ng T urner, w er e di sc ussi ng the fa ctthatthe autho ri t i es w er e i nv es t i gat i ng the cr i m e a s a n “ i nsi de j ob . ” D uri ng the conv er sa t i on , there w as s om e t a l k a bouthow e ve ry one i n the f a c i l i ty kne w the c om bi na t i on t o ope n the d o o r , to w h ic h T u rn e rv o lu n te e r e d th a t s h e d id n o t k n o w th e c o m b in a tio n a n d d id n o t w a n t to k n o w it. D a vi d I ke D e m ps e y , a nothe rdi s tr i but i on c l e r k, a l s o w or ke d w i th T urne rthe ni gh tof the theft . H e per ce i ved h eras “ j um py” w hen h e a rr i ved for hi s s hi ftthat6

ni ght . N ot a bl y , D e m ps e y a l s o t e s t i f i e d - - c ontr a ry t o T ur ne r ’ s s t a t e m e ntt o C om bs a nd T urne r ’ s ow n tr i a l t e s t i m ony w he r e s he de ni e d know i ng the c ode - - tha t , on num e r ous oc c a s i ons , he ha d s e e n the de f e nda ntgo i nt o the ba thr oom f r om the b r e a k r o o m a n d th e n r e e n te ru s in g th e c o m b in a tio n . T e m pl i n de s c r i be d how a tthe t i m e of the the f t , T urne rha d w or ke d f

orthe P os t a l S e r vi c e i n V a l dos t a f ora boutni ne y e a r s . F r om t i m e t o t i m e , i nc l udi ng a f e w t i m e s dur i ng the pr e c e di ng m onth of A ugus t2004, T urne rha d w or ke d i n the re gi stry ca ge. O n the day of the theft , T urner w as sc hedu l ed t o rel i eve T em pl i n at 11 : 00 p. m . and w ork u nt i l 7: 00 a. m . T em pl i n al so st at ed thatthe w ork schedul es w ere p o st ed an d accessi b l e t o al l em p l o yees. A n i nve nt ory of

the r obbe ry s c e ne l a t e rr e ve a l e d tha t28 of s om e 30 ba gs w e r e m i s s i ng f

r om the r e gi s try c a ge . T he ba gs tha tw e r e pl a c e d i n the c a ge general l y c on t ai ned cas h, m on ey orders , and checks fr om po st al patrons as w el l as ch eck -l i st s an d b an k -d ep o si tsl i p s. B ecau se th e ro b b ery o ccu rred o n a F ri d ay, w hi c h w a s pa y da y f

orm a ny c us t om e r s , a nd be c a us e i tw a s the thi r d da y of the m on th, w hen m any gov ernm entchec ks, i ncl ud i ng S oci al S ec uri ty c hecks, ar e re ce i ved and m on ey orders ar e purchase d, the depo si t s w er e m uch l ar ger than usual . In al l , m ore than $ 26 6, 00 0 w as t aken from the P ostO ff i ce .7

T he tri al evi dence al so es t abl i shed thatT urner and W i l l i am B roxt on had b e e n i n a r e l a t i o n s h i p f

o rs o me p e r i o d o f

t i me , a n d w e r e l i v i n g t o g e th e ra tth e t i me of the cr i m es . T urner’ s gross i ncom e f or the pri or ye arw as $3 6, 79 6, and she had f i l e d a pe r s ona l ba nkrupt c y pe t i t i on onl y a f e w m onths be f

or e the the f

t . B r oxt on had o cc as i on al em pl oym entas a day l aborer w i th a t em po ra ry em pl oym entagency in V a ld o s ta a n d v e ry lim ite d e a rn in g s - - h is W 2 f o r m r e f le c te d th a t h e e a rn e d o n ly $ 4 ,5 0 0 f o rth e e n tir e p r e v io u s y e a r . T h e th ir d c o - d e f e n d a n t, R o b e r t B r o x to n , is W i l l i a m B r oxt on’ s unc l e w ho l i ve d i n N e w J e r s e y w i th hi s gi r l f r i e nd, B r e nda L y nc h. R obe r tB r oxt on tr a ve l e d f r om N e w J e r s e y t o V a l dos t a s hor t l y be f or e the p o s ta l th e f

t o c c u rr e d . I n th e e a r ly m o rn in g o f

S e p te m b e r4 th , th e d a y a f te rth e la te - n ig h t th e f

t, R obe r tB r oxt on c a l l e d B r e nda L y nc h a nd s a i d tha the , W i l l i a m B r oxt on, a nd T u rn e rw e r e d r iv in g th a t m o rn in g f r o m V a ld o s ta to L y n c h ’s h o u s e in N e w J e r s e y . L ynch t es t i fi ed thatT urner and the B roxt on s a rr i ved ather hou se ea rl y on S un day m orni ng , af

t era dri ve of abou t16 ho urs, ac com pani ed by T urner’ s i nfant(W i l l i am B r o x to n ’s c h ild ) . T u rn e rs ta y e d f o ro n ly a b r ie f

tim e , le a v in g th e s a m e m o rn in g to d r iv e b a c k to V a ld o s ta in o r d e rto b e a b le to r e p o r t to w o rk th e f o llo w in g n ig h t. O n the day a ft erarri vi ng i n N ew Je rs ey , W i l l i am B roxt on w entt o a ca r de a l e r s hi p i n O r a nge , N e w J e r s e y , a c c om pa ni e d by B r e nda L y nc h, a nd m a de the8

fi rs tof a num ber of l ar ge ca sh pu rc hase s, payi ng $1 8, 50 0 i n cas h for a F ord E x p l o rer. A cco rd i n g t o th e sal esm an , R i ch ard A d etu l e, B ro x t o n o b t ai n ed th e cash f r om a pl a s t i c ga rba ge ba g, a nd ga ve a $100 c a s h t i p t o A de tul e . B r oxt on t i t l e d the c a rin B r e n d a L y n c h ’s n a m e . S om e t i m e i n the ne xtw e e k, B r oxt on r e turne d t o V a l dos t a . O n S e pt e m be r16, 20 04 , ac cordi ng t o h i s probat i on offi ce r, Je nn i fe r W al l ac e, B roxt on used a m on ey order t o p ay a $64 5 cou rt -order ed fi ne. O n the sa m e day , B roxt on w entt o Z al es J e w e le r s , w h e r e h e w a s a s s is te d b y J o s h u a D illo w w h o te s tif ie d th a t B r o x to n p a id ca sh for adi am on d eng agem entri ng cost i ng $3 , 00 0, and t hathe w as ac com pani ed by a bl a c k w om a n w hom D i l l ow c oul d notpos i t i ve l y i de nt i f y a s T urne r . T he gove rnm e nta l s o pr e s e nt e d e vi de nc e of B r oxt on’ s num e r ous c a s h pur c ha s e s i n the w ee ks fol l ow i ng the theft , i ncl ud i ng the pu rc hase of a s peaker box, a n am pl i fi er , a c a rC D p la y e rf

o r$ 5 0 0 , a n d a n e w w in d o w o n th e F o r d E x p lo r e rf o r$ 2 5 0 . O n S ep t em b er 2 2 n d , w h i l e d ri v i n g th e F o rd E x p l o rer, B ro x t o n , w h o se d r iv e r ’s lic e n s e h a d b e e n r e v o k e d , w a s s to p p e d f o ra n im p r o p e r ly d is p la y e d ta g . B roxt on t ol d the offi ce r, M i chae l W el do n o f the L ow nd es C ou nty S heri ff’ s O ff i ce , th at h is w ife w as fo ll o w in g b eh in d h im . In re sp o n se to O ff icerW eld o n ’s q u e s tio n in g a b o u t w h e r e h e a n d h is w if e w e r e e m p lo y e d , B r o x to n c la im e d th a t h is w i f e w or ke d f

orthe m i l i t a ry . T he r e a f t e r , B r oxt on w a s a rr e s t e d f ordr i vi ng w i th a9

s us pe nde d l i c e ns e . T urne ra rr i ve d a tthe s c e ne a nd t ol d O f f i c e rW e l don tha ts he w ant ed t o t ake posse ss i on of the F ord E xp l orer . T he offi ce r r es po nd ed thatT urner coul d n ott ake the vehi cl e bec ause she w as no tthe re gi st er ed ow ner a nd there w as no pr oof of i ns ur a nc e on the ve hi c l e . T ur ne rthe n f a l s e l y s a i d tha ts he w a s the ow ner, thather nam e w as “ B re nd a L ynch, ” a nd thatshe l i ved i n the P enny P l ac e ar eaof V al do st a. In fa ct , T urner l i ved i n ano ther a re a of t ow n, on W roxh am C ir c le . S om e thr e e da y s l a t e r , B r oxt on, a c c om pa ni e d by de f e nda ntT urne r , w e ntt o a u s e d - c a rd e a le r s h ip in V a ld o s ta , w h e r e B r o x to n p a id s lig h tly m o r e th a n $ 1 3 ,0 0 0 in c a s h f o rth e p u r c h a s e o f

a C h e v r o le t S u b u rb a n . O n S e pt e m be r30th, U . S . P os t a l I ns pe c t or s M a r l a M c L e ndon, J a m e s H a y s on, a n d M ic h a e l I o r io e x e c u te d a s e a r c h w a rr a n t a t T u rn e r ’s r e s id e n c e . T u rn e rin itia lly a s k e d th e o f

f ic e r s to c o m e b a c k la te r , s ta tin g th a t s h e w a s g e ttin g m a rr ie d th a t d a y . T urne re ve ntua l l y a l l ow e d the i ns pe c t or s t o e nt e r . T he i ns pe c t or s obs e r ve d a nd c onf i s c a t e d a ba c kpa c k tha tw a s pa r t i a l l y w e dge d be hi nd the m a s t e r - be dr oom dres se r. T he backpack conta i ned som e $9, 78 0 i n cas h. O ne of the bi l l s w as s t a mp e d “ U SPS” i n r e d i n k , w h i l e s e v e n o th e rb i l l s h a d p a r t i a l s t a mp s o rth e s a me r e d i nk on the m - - thi s i nk a nd the s e m a r ki ngs w e r e c ons i s t e ntw i th the r ound da t e - s t a m ps of

t e n appl i e d by pos t a l e m pl oy e e s w he n the e m pl oy e e s s t a m p the10

m one y - s tr ap tha ts e c ur e s the c urr e nc y i n a r e m i tt a nc e . A l s o i n the hous e , the i nve s t i ga t or s f

ound aZ a l e s r e c e i ptf

orthe pur c ha s e of

the di a m ond e nga ge m e nt r in g . T he i nve s t i ga t or s a l s o c onf i s c a t e d T urne r ’ s c he c k r e gi s try , w hi c h I ns pe c t or M c L e n d o n te s tif

ie d r e f le c te d th a t T u rn e r“c o n s is te n tly k e p t n e g a tiv e b a la n c e s ” in her bank account unt i l S ept em ber 7, 20 04 , w hen t here w as a posi t i ve bal ance . In th e la s t e n try , d a te d S e p te m b e r2 4 th , th e b a la n c e w a s $ 2 ,2 0 0 . I n th e c o u r s e o f th e ir se ar ch of T urner’ s hom e, the i nspect ors i nst al l ed a tra cki ng devi ce on T urner’ s c ar . A f e w hour s a f

t e rthe s e a r c h, a l i tt l e a f t e rm i dni ght , a c c or di ng t o the tr a c ki ng de vi c e , T urne rdr ove f

r om V a l dos t a t o M a ry l a nd. S he r e tur ne d thr e e da y s l a t e r , on O ct ob er3rd, dri vi ng on I- 10 throu gh Je nn i ng s, F l ori da. S he arri ved ather hou se at 10: 00 p. m . , w a s a tthe hous e f ora bout25 m i nut e s , a nd the n gotba c k i n he rc a ra nd re turned t o Jenni ng s, w here she s pentthe ni gh tata m ot el . T he nextday, O ct ob er 4 th , s h e d r o v e to L a k e C ity , F lo r id a , w h ic h is a b o u t o n e h o u rs o u th o f V a ld o s ta , and rent ed a s t orage uni t . S he used an al i as , T ra nese T ow nsend -- anam e that n o b o d y w ith w h o m sh e w o rk ed h ad ev erh ea rd h eru se -- a M ar ylan d d riv er ’s l i c e ns e , a nd a n i na c c ur a t e a ddr e s s a nd t e l e phone num be ri n M a ry l a nd. I nf or m a t i on f r om the tr a c ki ng de vi c e on he rve hi c l e a l s o r e f l e c t e d tha tT ur ne rr e turne d t o the L a ke C i ty s t or a ge uni ts e ve r a l t i m e s be tw e e n O c t obe r4th a nd O c t obe r15th,11

in c lu d in g o n th e d a y th a t s h e w a s s e r v e d w ith a s u b p o e n a f r o m a g r a n d ju ry . H ow ever , a s ea rc h atthe end o f thatt i m e- fr am e r evea l ed thatthe st orage l ocker w as em p ty ex cep tfo r a few cl o th es an d h o u seh o l d i t em s. T he go vernm ental so pres ent ed the t es t i m on y of R on al d B ec kstrom , an att orney w ho had repres ent ed B roxt on i n a pri or m att er . B ec kstrom t ol d the j ury tha ton O c t obe r6th, T urne rc a m e t o hi s of f i c e a nd m a de a c a s h pa y m e ntf orthe f e e s B r oxt on s t i l l ow e d, w hi c h a m ount e d t o $2, 975. W hi l e B r oxt on w a s i n l oc a l c us t ody , he a nd T urne rha d a num be rof t e l e phone c onve r s a t i ons tha tw e r e r e c or de d by the a uthor i t i e s . T he r e c or di ngs w e r e pl a y e d f

orthe j ury dur i ng the gove rnm e nt ’ s c a s e . I n one t e l e phone c o n v e r s a tio n , o n O c to b e r4 th , B r o x to n a s k e d T u rn e rw h e n s h e h a d th e o p p o r tu n ity t o u se a pay -pho ne, t o cal l “ hi s f ri ends” a nd t el l them t o “ di sapp ea r” w i th h i m . In a nothe rc onve r s a t i on, on O c t obe r13th, B r oxt on a s s ur e d T ur ne rtha the ha d a l l the fa i th i n the w orl d i n h erand t hathi s f ai th w as the re as on thathe w as “ here w here I’ m at , ” a nd “ do i ng w hatI’ m do i ng . ” T urner r es po nd ed thatshe w ou l d “ never s ay a n y th in g a g a in s t” B r o x to n . A c oupl e of

da y s l a t e r , i n s t i l l a nothe rr e c or de d c onve r s a t i on, B r oxt on a nd T urner t al ked abo utgett i ng m arri ed and d i sc usse d h ow thatw ou l d p rot ec tthem fr om bei ng forc ed t o t es t i fy or m ake s t at em ent s a gai nston e a no ther. F i nal l y, i n yetTh ere le va nt p or tio n o f P arrish ’ste stimony is t his : 3 Q. What did he tell you about any individuals insi de the post off ice? A. You know, that his wifeworke d there , or his old lady or wha tever . You know, l i k e , h i s ki d ' s m am a

w o r k e d th e re , an d , l i k e , h es ay th atwh e nh edi d th eb urg l ar

y, you know, like, he had caught a dude that wa s workingon the bac k, you know, sleeping , and that' s when the dudetook off, and that's when he did what he did, and he le ft bec ause sheg et off thenext m orningat seven. Q. Did he sa

y any thing a bout his wife, g irlfriend' s role in the burg lary? Did she h av e any ro l e i ni to r d o any

th i n g? A. Ye ah, ' c a

us esh ewo rke d th e re , you kn ow , s hewo rke d th at ni ght. 12 anot her j ai l ho use t ape- re cordi ng , B roxt on t ol d T urner thathe w ou l d h ave m urdered the fe dera l agent s i f he had been prese ntw hen t he se ar ch w arra ntw as exec ut ed at Tu rn e r ’ s r e s i d e n c e . H e s a i d “ I ’ d v e o p e n f i r e d , ” a n d “ n o w , c a n y o u i ma g i n e me be i ng hom e w he n the y c a m e the r e ? ” T urne rr e s ponde d: “ U m , I ’ m gl a d y ou w a s n’ t . ” B r oxt on i ndi c a t e d tha t“ s om e body ha d hur t , ” a nd T urne rl a ughe d a nd r e s ponde d “ uh huh, a nd w e ’ d be runni ng outthe ba c kdoor . ” B r oxt on the n s a i d,

“ s hi t , w oul d ha ve da m n s ur e gotugl y , ” a nd T ur ne rr e s ponde d, “ I know . ” D ur i ng th e irf in a l r e c o r d e d te le p h o n e c o n v e r s a tio n , T u rn e rto ld B r o x to n th a t th e y c o u ld ha ve m ove d a nd l e f

tthe c ountry i f

B r oxt on ha d e nga ge d i n the s c e na r i o i nvol vi ng th e m u r d e ro f

f e d e r a l a g e n ts . T u rn e rs a id , “W e ’d h a v e b e e n o n th e ru n liv in g in C anada. ” S he al so offe re d thatshe c ou l d chang e hernam e. T h e B ru to n er ro rs o cc u rr ed d u rin g th e tes ti m o n y o f tw o o f th e g o v er n m en t’ s w i tne s s e s : R obe r tP a rr i s h, w ho ha d be e n W i l l i a m B r oxt on’ s c e l l m a t e i n j a i l , a nd 3Q. Did she do a ny thing to help him, g ive him any information? A. Ye ah, le t him kn owwh e reit w a s. Q. Wherewh at w a s? A. Wherethemon e y

wa s.

. . . . Q. Do you know who laid out – did he tell you who laid out the plan? A. Said his wife did. Vol. III , p. 69-70. Th ere le va

nt p or tio n o f Tho rp ’ste stimony fo llo ws : 4 Q. While you were there at the Guest House Inn in Valdosta, did Black, Mr. Brox ton, make some statements to you about a thef t or a burg lary

of a post off

ice? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did he state? A. I don’t havea re collection of e x act words, but something alongthe lines of – that him and his uncle and somebody else had robbed thepost office . Q. Had what? A. Had robbe d th epo st o ff ic ethat hi s w if

ewo rke d at. Q. Di d h estateany

thinga bo ut what hi s w if

e ' s invo lvement w a s? A. Th at sh ehad g iven th e m th einf or matio n o n h owto g o a

bo ut it. Q. Who was the other individual? The wife , Ms. Turner , and I ' m sorry, you mentioned another

individual, an uncle? A. Yes. Y es, sir. Q. Do you know the uncle ' s name? 13 L a k is h a T h o rp , w h o h a d u s e d d ru g s o n s e v e r a l o c c a s io n s w ith B r o x to n . T h is 4A. No, sir.

Q. Did he stateor tell you who was theorg anizer? A. His wife, be causeshe wa s the one who w orked there. Vol. III , p. 189-90. See Jencks v. United States, 353 U.S. 657 (1957); 18 U.S.C. § 3500 (requiring g overn- 5 ment to disclose to criminal defendant any prior statement made by g overnment witness that relate s to the witness’s trial testimony). 14 m u c h is c le a rf

r o m th e te s tim o n y . B o th te s tif ie d a b o u t B r o x to n ’s s ta te m e n ts to the m , w he r e i n B r oxt on a dm i tt e d c om m i tt i ng the c ha r ge d c r i m e s . T he B rut on vi ol a t i ons oc c urr e d w he n the w i tne s s e s both s t a t e d, a f t e re xt e ns i ve e nc our a ge m e nt thr ough l e a di ng que s t i ons f r om the A s s i s t a ntU . S . A tt orne y , tha tT urne rw a s the o r g a n iz e ro f

th e s c h e m e . A tno poi ntdur i ng the pr os e c ut or ’ s que s t i ons , w hi c h w e r e f r a m e d i n s uc h a m a nne ra s t o s qua r e l y e l i c i tt e s t i m ony tha tvi ol a t e d B rut on, ordur i ng the e xt e ns i ve B ru t o n -o ffen d i n g t est i m o n y o f ei th er w i tn ess, d i d d efen se co u n sel o b j ecto r req u est a c u r a t i v e i n s tru c t i o n . R a th e r , th e o n l y d e f e n s e a r g u m e n tc o n c e rn i n g th e two w i tness es ’ t es t i m on y c am e a tthe concl usi on of bo th d i re ctexam i nat i on s, w hen B roxt on ’ s a tt orney m ov ed for “ Je ncks m at er i al s” and t he go vernm entre spon ded 5 tha ta l l of

the J e nc ks m a t e r i a l ha d be e n pr ovi de d. T he pa r t i e s a gr e e tha ta ts om e poi nta f t e rc our tha d r e c e s s e d f

orthe da y , the di s tr i c tj udge t ol d the pr os e c ut ortha the thoughtthe r e w a s a B rut on pr obl e m a nd15

di r e c t e d the pr os e c ut ort o t e l l de f e ns e c ouns e l a boutthe m a tt e r . T he ne xtda y , the di s tr i c tc our tbe ga n by a s ki ng f ora r gum e nton the B rut on i s s ue . T he gove rnm e nt a d m itte d th e B ru to n v io la tio n s , b u t s ta te d its b e lie f th a t th e tr ia l c o u ld p r o c e e d w ith a c urat i ve i nstruct i on . T urner’ s c ou nsel subsequent l y m ov ed for ase vera nce, w h ic h th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to o k u n d e ra d v is e m e n t, in d ic a tin g th a t it w a n te d to h e a ra ll o f th e e v id e n c e f

ir s t. A tthe end o f the go vernm ent ’ s c as e, T urner’ s c ou nsel ar gu ed thatthere w as no e vi de nc e of

a n a gr e e m e ntbe tw e e n T urne ra nd the B r oxt ons , othe rtha n the B rut on -vi ol at i ve t es t i m on y of P arri sh and T ho rp. C ou nsel agai n m ov ed for a s e ve r a nc e a nd m ove d f

ora j udgm e ntof

a c qui tt a l ( “ J O A ” ) . T he gove rnm e nt r e s ponde d tha tT urne r ’ s f a i l ur e t o r a i s e a t i m e l y obj e c t i on, c ont e m por a ne ous w i th the B rut on- of

f e ndi ng t e s t i m ony , m e a nttha ta ny e rr orw a s s ubj e c tt o ha r m l e s s - e rr or a n a l y s i s . T h e d i s tr i c tc o u r td e n i e d th e m o t i o n s f o rs e v e r a n c e a n d f

o rJ OA . In h i s d efen se, B ro x t o n o ffered th e t est i m o n y o f h i s m o th er an d th ree si st ers, a l l of w hom c l a i m e d t o ha ve m a de va r i ous c a s h gi f t s t o B r oxt on a r ound the t i m e of th e r o b b e ry . T h e c a s h g if ts e x c e e d e d $ 2 0 ,0 0 0 , b u t th e w itn e s s e s w e r e u n a b le to e xpl a i n the s our c e of

the m one y s i nc e the y w e r e e i the rr e t i r e d ( the m othe r ) or u n e m p lo y e d ( th e s is te r s ) . O n e o f B r o x to n ’s s is te r s a ls o c la im e d to h a v e s e e n h im recei v e ab o u t$ 6 , 0 0 0 i n cash fo r a co n stru ct i o n j o b h e w o rk ed o n i n N ew Jersey.16

I n he row n de f

e ns e , T urne rpr e s e nt e d the t e s t i m ony of tw o c o- w or ke r s w ho s a i d tha tthe y w e r e f

a m i l i a rw i th T ur ne r ’ s r e put a t i on f orhone s ty a nd ve r a c i ty , a nd th a tTu rn e rh a d b e e n h o n e s tw i th th e m. T urner al so t es t i fi ed ext ensi vel y i n h erow n d ef ense . A cc ordi ng t o T urner, o n th e d a y o f

th e th e f t, s h e w a s h o m e in th e a f te rn o o n a n d e v e n in g u n til 1 0 :0 0 p .m . S h e s a id th a t B r o x to n g o t h o m e a r o u n d 7 :0 0 p .m . a n d w a tc h e d th e c h ild r e n w h ile she t oo k a shortnap p ri or t o l ea vi ng for w ork a l i tt l e a ft er10 : 00 p. m . S he cl ai m ed thatB roxt on w as ho m e the w ho l e t i m e bef ore s he l ef

tfor w ork. W hen she fi ni shed w o r k in g h e rs h if

t a t 7 :0 0 a .m ., B r o x to n u n e x p e c te d ly a s k e d h e rto a c c o m p a n y h im and h i s uncl e on a dri ve fr om F l ori da t o N ew Je rs ey . S he sa i d she had n otpl anned to g o to N e w J e r s e y . T h e y le f t s h o r tly a f

te rT u rn e rf

in is h e d h e rs h if

t. T urner s ai d thaton the w ay t o N ew Je rs ey , she dropp ed three of her c hi l dren o ff w i th h er m o th er i n M aryl an d . S h e th en b ro u g h tth e B ro x t o n s t o N ew Jersey, dr oppe d the m of

f , a nd w e ntdi r e c t l y ba c k t o M a ry l a nd. A f t e ra nap i n M a ry l a nd, s he pr om pt l y r e turne d hom e w i th he rm othe ra nd a l l of he rc hi l dr e n s o tha ts he c oul d r e turn t o he rj ob i n V a l dos t a . O n the e ve ni ng of M onda y , S e pt e m be r6th, T u rn e rr e p o r te d f

o rh e rr e g u la rs h if

t. O n c r os s - e xa m i na t i on, w he n a s ke d a boutthe j a i l hous e r e c or di ngs of c onve r s a t i ons s he ha d w i th B r oxt on, T urne rf i r s tc l a i m e d tha ts he c oul d not17

re m em ber the ph on e c al l s a tal l . T hen, she s ug gest ed, she w as no tsure i tw as her v o i ce o n th e t ap es an d o ffered th ath er v o i ce so u n d s l i k e h er m o th er’ s, h er si st er’ s, a nd he rda ught e r ’ s voi c e s . W he n a s ke d a bouthe rw e ddi ng, w hi c h s he ha d t ol d the p o s ta l in s p e c to r s w a s to ta k e p la c e o n th e d a y o f th e s e a r c h o f

h e rh o u s e , s h e s a id s he c oul d notr e m e m be rw he n B r oxt on ga ve he rthe e nga ge m e ntr i ng. D ur i ng r e d ir e c t e x a m in a tio n , h e ra tto rn e y a s k e d a s e r ie s o f q u e s tio n s m e a n t to r e h a b ilita te T urner, i n res po nse t o w hi ch she r ec ant ed her cl ai m thatshe c ou l d n otre cogn i ze he row n voi c e on the t ape s a nd s ugge s t e d tha ta l though s he c oul d notr e m e m be rthe Z a l e s e nga ge m e ntr i ng, s he ha d r e c e i ve d a di f f e r e nte nga ge m e ntr i ng f r om B r oxt on ab o u to n e year b efo re th e ro b b ery. I n i t s c ha r ge t o the j ury , the di s tr i c tc our ti nc l ude d the f ol l ow i ng l i m i t i ng i n stru ct i o n co n cern i n g P arri sh ’ s an d T h o rp ’ s B ru t o n -v i o l at i v e t est i m o n y:

W h e n th e G o v e rn m e n t o f f e r s te s tim o n y o re v id e n c e th a t a D e f e nda ntm a de a s t a t e m e ntora dm i s s i on t o s om e one , a f t e rbe i ng a rr e s t e d orde t a i ne d, the j ury s houl d c ons i de rthe e vi de nc e c onc e rni ng such a s t at em entw i th caut i on and g re atca re . I ti s f ory ou t o de c i de ( 1) w he the ra D e f e nda ntm a de a ny s t a t e m e nta nd ( 2) i f

s o, how m uc h w e i ghtt o gi ve t o i t . I n m a ki ng the s e de c i s i ons y ou s houl d c ons i de ra l l of the e vi de nc e a boutthe st at em ent , i ncl ud i ng the ci rc um st ance s und erw hi ch a D ef endantm ay h a v e m a d e it. O f c our s e , a ny s uc h s t a t e m e nts houl d notbe c ons i de r e d i n a ny w a y w ha t e ve ra s e vi de nc e w i th r e s pe c tt o a ny othe rD e f e nda nton tr ia l.Th ePSI us e d th efo llo wingthre egroup s a nd c or re sp on dingof

fens ele ve ls: 6 (1 ) a 24 fo r C ountsOn e , Two , a nd Thre eba se d o n a

ba seof fens ele ve l of

6, purs ua nt to § § 2 X 1 . 1 ( a) an d 2 B 1 . 1 ; a 1 2 - lev e l u p w ard a d ju s tm e nt f

o r th e amount o f lo s s , § 2B1.1(b)(1) (G); a

2-leve l upward adjustm en t fo r an off ense involvingthe consc ious or rec kless risk of death or serious bodily injury , § 2 B1 .1(b)( 12)(A) ; a 2-leve l upward adjustment for a

buse of a position of publ ic trust, § 3B1.3; and a 2-level upward adjustment fo r obs tr uc tio n o f j us tic e , § 3C1 .1 ; (2) a 14 for Count Six , pursuant to § 2J 1.2; and (3) a 23 for Count Eight based on a base offense l evel of 20, pursuant to § 2S1.1; a 1-level upward adjustment for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957, § 2S1.1(b)( 2)(A) ; and a 2- level upwa rd adjustment for obstruc tion of justice, § 3C1.1. 18 T w o w i tne s s e s , R obe r tP a rr i s h a nd L a ke i s ha T horp, ha ve t es t i fi ed re gardi ng ou tof courtst at em ent s by D ef endantW i l l i am B r oxt on, a nd i n de t e r m i ni ng the gui l tori nnoc e nc e of D e f e nda nt T urne ry ou a r e nott o c ons i de ra ny of the a l l e ge d s t a t e m e nt s of D e f e nda ntB r oxt on. T he j ury f

ou nd T urner gui l ty on al l char ged cou nt s e xceptC ou ntS even. T urner agai n m ov ed for anew tri al base d o n the B rut on errors , and t he di stri ctcourt r e s e r v e d ru lin g . T urner then p roce eded t o sent enci ng . T he pres ent ence i nv es t i gat i on re po rt ( “ P S I ” ) f i r s tgr oupe d the of

f e ns e s of c onvi c t i on ( putt i ng C ount s O ne , T w o, a nd T hr e e t oge the rba s e d on the i rr e l a t e dne s s ) , pur s ua ntt o U . S . S . G . § 3D 1. 2, a nd c a l c u l a t e d o f

f e n s e l e v e l s f

o re a c h g r o u p . Pu r s u a n tt o U . S. S. G . § 3 D 1 . 3 ( a ) , th e PSI

6 used an adj ust ed offens e l evel 24 , w hi ch yi el ded a S ent enci ng G ui del i nes a dv i sory r a n g e o f 5 1 t o 6 3 mo n th s i mp r i s o n me n t . Tu rn e rf a c e d f i v e - y e a rma x i mu m t e r ms19

on C ount s O ne a nd T w o a nd t e n- y e a rm a xi m um t e r m s on C ount s T hr e e , S i x, a nd E ig h t. T he go vernm entfi l ed a w ri tt en obj ec t i on t o the P S I’ s f ai l ure t o ass es s a n up w ar d adj ustm entfor T urner’ s a gg ra vat i ng rol e i n the offens e a nd ar gu ed, base d o n th e f a c t th a t T u rn e rw a s th e “in s id e r ,” “m a s te r m in d ,” a n d “b r a in s ” o f th e th e f t, tha tthe of

f e ns e l e ve l s houl d be a dj us t e d, pur s ua ntt o U . S . S . G . § 3B 1. 1. T he g o v er n m en t also ar g u ed fo r a n u p w ar d d ep ar tu re b as ed o n T u rn er ’s an d B ro x to n ’s t el ep h o n e co n v ersat i o n s w h en th ey d i scu ssed k i l l i n g fed eral ag en t s, assu m i n g fal se i d en t i t i es, an d fl eei n g th e co u n try. A tthe se nt enci ng hear i ng , T urner’ s a tt orney not ed thathi s m ot i on for anew tri al base d o n the B rut on errors w as st i l l pend i ng . T he di stri ctcourtre spon ded t hat i tw oul d e nt e ra w r i tt e n or de rl a t e r . T urne rs oughta dow nw a r d va r i a nc e ba s e d on T u rn e r ’s la c k o f

a p r io rc r im in a l h is to ry , h e rg a in f u l e m p lo y m e n t d u r in g h e ra d u lt l i f e , he rhonor a bl e s e r vi c e i n the U . S . m i l i t a ry , a nd the f a c ttha ts he ha s f

our c hi l dr e n. A s f

orthe j a i l hous e r e c or di ngs , de f e ns e c ouns e l s ugge s t e d tha tthe co n v er sa ti o n ab o u t k il li n g th e f ed er al ag en ts ex ec u ti n g th e w ar ra n t at T u rn er ’s h o u s e “w a s o f

a jo k in g n a tu r e ” a n d “w a s a ll in je s t.”Brox ton rec eived a 300-month term consisting of : concur rent 60-month sentences f or 7 Counts One and Two; c oncurrent 120-month terms for Counts Thre e, Four , and F ive, conse cutive to the sentenc es on Counts One and Two; concurrent 120-month sentence s on Counts S even a nd Eight, consecutive to the sentenc es on Counts Three , Four , and F ive; and 120-month t erm s on CountsNineand

Ten, c on c ur

rent withtheoth e r s e ntenc e s.

20 T he di stri ctcourtexpres se d i t s bel i ef thatbase d o n the evi dence i thear d at tr i a l , a nd i n l i ghtof

the j ury ve r di c t , T ur ne r ’ s c r i m e s pr e s e nt e d “ a ve ry s e r i ous m a tt e r . ” T he c our tthe n s a i d: I r ec og ni ze thatthe S up re m e C ou rtrul i ng i n [B oo ker] se t s f orth that the di s tr i c tc our t s , w hi l e notbe i ng bound t o appl y the s e nt e nc i ng gu i del i nes, m ustconsul t[them ] and t ake them i nt o acc ou ntw hen se nt enci ng . In i m po si ng se nt ence t od ay , I have t aken the gu i del i nes unde ra dvi s e m e nta nd de t e r m i ne d the a dvi s or y s e nt e nc i ng r a nge i s 51 to 6 3 m o n th s . . .. I f

in d th e a d v is o ry r a n g e to b e in a d e q u a te . . . . T urner w as se nt ence d t o a 24 0-m on th t erm of i m pri sonm entconsi st i ng of: c onc urr e nt60- m onth s e nt e nc e s on C ount s O ne a nd T w o, ove r l appi ng c onc ur r e nt 120- m onth s e nt e nc e s on C ount s T hr e e a nd S i x, a nd a 120- m onth c ons e c ut i ve s e n te n c e o n C o u n t E ig h t. 7 I n im p o s in g s e n te n c e , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t o b s e r v e d : T he se nt ence as i m po se d i s a n app ropri at e s ent ence i n thi s c as e, and i t ’ s m y j ud gm entthatsuch se nt ence com pl i es w i th the fa ct ors that a r e t o be c ons i de r e d a s s e tf or th i n 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) . I n i m pos i ng s e nt e nc e , the C our tha s s pe c i f i c a l l y c ons i de r e d the na tur e a nd c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f

th e o f f e n s e s a n d y o u rh is to ry a n d c h a r a c te r is tic s . T he C ou rtca nn otdi sm i ss tri al t es t i m on y a nd evi dence, i ncl ud i ng the re corded conv er sa t i on w here i n the defendant s di sc usse d the w i l l i ng ness t o m urder f eder al agent s duri ng the execut i on of a s e a r c h w a rr a n t a t y o u rr e s id e n c e . T h e C o u r t b e lie v e s th e d e f e n d a n ts21

ful l y c apabl e of s uch act i on s s ho ul d the op po rtun i ty have pres ent ed i t se l f, and t he defendant s had the m ea ns of com pl et i ng such ac t s a s e vi de nc e d by the f

a c tD e f e nda ntB r oxt on pos s e s s e d a s t ol e n ha ndgun and D ef endantT urner’ s r ef

er ence t o h erhand gu n i n the re corded co n v ersat i o n s. T he C ou rtal so no t es the defendant ’ s l ac k o f r em orse for s uch a c tio n s a s e v id e n c e d b y [ h e r ] r e m a r k s th a t th e tw o d e f e n d a n ts w o u ld fl ee th e U n i t ed S t at es an d assu m e fal se i d en t i t i es. T he C our tbe l i e ve s tha tthe s e nt e nc e i m pos e d t a ke s i nt o a c c ount the s e r i ous ne s s of

the of f e ns e s , pr om ot e s r e s pe c tf orthe l a w , a nd pr ovi de s j us tpuni s hm e nti n thi s c a s e . T he C our ti s a l s o of the opi ni on thatthe se nt ence prov i des a dequ at e det erre nce f rom further c ri m i nal c onduc ta nd pr ot e c t s the publ i c f r om f ur the rc r i m e s tha tm a y be p e rp e tr a te d b y th is d e f

e n d a n t. A f t e rthe c our ta nnounc e d i t s s e nt e nc e , the gove rnm e nta s ke d f orc l a r i f i c a t i on c onc e rni ng i t s r e que s tf ora l e a de r - or ga ni z e rupw a r d a dj us tm e nt : “ f orpurpos e s of ha vi ng a c l e a rr e c or d, m y que s t i on t o the C ourti s di d the C our tgr a ntthe go vernm ent ’ s m ot i on for tw o t o fou r poi nt s f or l ea der- organi ze r? ” T he di stri ct c o u r t r e s p o n d e d “N o .” O ne w e e k l a t e r , the di s tr i c tc our te nt e r e d a w r i tt e n or de rde ny i ng the m ot i on f o ra n e w tr ia l a n d n o tin g th a t, a lth o u g h “[ t]h e r e is n o q u e s tio n th a t th e s ta te m e n ts of defendantB roxt on t o w hi ch M r. P arri sh and M s. T ho rp t es t i fi ed vi ol at ed T urne r ’ s r i ght s unde rB rut on, ” the e rr or s w e r e undoubt e dl y ha r m l e s s gi ve n the subst ant i al ci rc um st ant i al evi dence l i nk i ng T urner t o the conspi ra cy . T hi s app ea l f ol l ow e d.22 II . T h e p ar ti es d isag re e o n th e s tan d ar d o f r ev iew ap p li ca b le to T u rn er ’s B rut on cl ai m . T he go vernm enturges us t o revi ew the i ss ue for pl ai n err or base d o n T u rn e r ’s f

a ilu r e to c o n te m p o r a n e o u s ly o b je c t, w h ile T u rn e rm a in ta in s s h e is en t i t l ed t o h arm l ess-erro r rev i ew b ased o n h er n o n -co n t em p o ran eo u s arg u m en t s, w hi c h s he pr e s e nt e d t o the di s tr i c tc our ton the da y f ol l ow i ng the a dm i s s i on of the di s put e d t e s t i m ony . I ti s ha r dl y s urpr i s i ng tha tthe pa r t i e s di s a gr e e on the co n tro l l i n g st an d ard o f rev i ew i n asm u ch as th e st an d ard s d i ffer sh arp l y. N orm al l y, w e w ou l d revi ew i ss ues c on ce rni ng a di stri ctcourt ’ s e vi dent i ary rul i ngs , s uc h a s the B rut on c l a i m he r e , f ora bus e of

di s c r e t i on, U ni t e d S t a t e s v. J im in e z , 2 2 4 F .3 d 1 2 4 3 , 1 2 4 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) , a n d w o u ld s u b je c t im p r o p e r ly a d m itte d B ru to n e v id e n c e to r e v ie w f o rh a r m le s s n e s s b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b le d o u b t, m ean i n g th atw e w o u l d ask w h eth er “ th e p ro p erl y ad m i tt ed ev i d en ce o f g u i l t[w as] so o v erw h el m i n g , an d th e p rej u d i ci al effect of the co -d efen d an t ’ s st at em en tso i ns i gni f i c a nt , tha tbe y ond a ny r e a s ona bl e doubtthe i m pr ope rus e of the s t a t e m e nt w a s h a r m le s s .” U n ite d S ta te s v . D o h e r ty , 2 3 3 F .3 d 1 2 7 5 , 1 2 8 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . H ow e ve r , i ti s w e l l - s e tt l e d tha tw he r e , a s he r e , a de f e nda ntf a i l s t o pr e s e r ve a n e v id e n tia ry ru lin g b y c o n te m p o r a n e o u s ly o b je c tin g , o u rr e v ie w is o n ly f o rp la in error. S ee , e. g. , U ni t ed S t at es v. S i dd i qu i , 23 5 F . 3d 13 18 , 13 22 (11t h C i r. 20 00 );23

U ni t ed S t at es v. C al deron, 12 7 F . 3d 13 14 , 13 34 (11t h C i r. 19 97 ) ( “ A s a n evi dent i ary m att er , a c on t em po ra neou s obj ec t i on w as re qu i re d t o al l ow the di stri ct c our tthe oppor tuni ty t o c orr e c ta ny e rr ortha tm a y ha ve e xi s t e d. ” ) ; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S i m on, 964 F . 2d 1082, 1085 ( 11th C i r . 1992) ( “ T hi s c our tge ne r a l l y doe s not r e vi e w e vi de nt i a ry rul i ngs e xc e pton the gr ounds a s s e r t e d i n a c ont e m por a ne ous obj e c t i on. ” ) ; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. P e r e z - G a r c i a , 904 F . 2d 1534, 1540 ( 11th C i r . 1990) (“ T he l ac k o f acont em po ra neou s hea rs ay obj ec t i on re qu i re s thi s c ou rtt o revi ew the adm i ss i on of the t es t i m on y und erthe st andard of pl ai n err or. ”) ; se e a l so U ni t ed S ta te s v . J o b e , 1 0 1 F .3 d 1 0 4 6 , 1 0 6 8 ( 5 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) ( r e v ie w in g B ru to n c la im o n ly for pl ai n err or w here defe nd antfa i l ed t o o bj ec tt o o ff endi ng t es t i m on y a nd w here othe re vi de nc e of

gui l tw a s s uf

f i c i e ntt o s uppor tc onvi c t i on) ; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a r tw r i ght , 6 F . 3d 294, 300 ( 5th C i r . 1993) ( hol di ng tha tno pl a i n B rut on e rr or o c c u rr e d w h e n o th e re v id e n c e o f g u ilt w a s o v e rw h e lm in g ) . P l a i n- e rr orr e vi e w di f

f e r s f r om ha r m l e s s - e rr orr e vi e w i n both purpos e a nd sc op e. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. S i m m on s, 96 1 F . 2d 18 3, 18 5 n . 1 (11 th C i r. 19 92 ) ( per c u r ia m ) . M o s t n o tab ly , u n lik e h a r m le s s - e rr o rr e v ie w , p la in - e rr o rr e v ie w is i nt ended t o enforce the re qu i re m entthatpart i es l od ge t i m el y obj ec t i on s t o err ors a t tr i a l s o a s t o pr ovi de the di s tr i c tc our tw i th a n oppor tuni ty t o a voi d orc orr e c ta ny e rr or , a nd thus a voi d the c os t s of r e ve r s a l a nd a r e tr i a l . I d. ( c i t i ng U ni t e d S t a t e s v.24

S o r o n d o , 8 4 5 F .2 d 9 4 5 , 9 4 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 8 ) ) . “C o n s e q u e n tly , p r o o f o f a p la in erro r i n v o l v es n o to n l y a sh o w i n g o f h arm , b u tal so p ro o f th atth e erro r w as so conspi cuou s thatthe ‘ j ud ge and p rose cut or w er e der el i cti n cou nt enanci ng i t . ’ ” I d. ( quot i ng Un i t e d S t a t e s v . B o n a v i a , 9 2 7 F . 2 d 5 6 5 , 5 7 0 ( 1 1 th C i r . 1 9 9 1 ) ) . “ An e rr o rth a t is n o t h a r m le s s , th e n , is n o t n e c e s s a r ily a p la in e rr o r .” I d . I n a d d itio n to th e d i fferen ces i n p u rp o se serv ed b y th e p l ai n -erro r an d h arm l ess-erro r st an d ard s, the s t a nda r ds a l s o di f

f e ri n appl i c a t i on i n tw o s i gni f i c a ntw a y s . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M onr oe , 353 F . 3d 1346, 1352 ( 11th C i r . 2003) . F i r s t , unde rpl a i n- e rr orr e vi e w , the de f e nda ntbe a r s the bur de n of pe r s ua s i on t o s how pr e j udi c e ora n e f

f e c ton s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s , w he r e a s unde rha r m l e s s - e rr orr e vi e w , the gove rnm e ntha s the bur de n of

e s t a bl i s hi ng ha r m l e s s ne s s be y ond a r e a s ona bl e doubt . I d. S e c ond,

“ p l ai n -erro r rev i ew h as th e ad d i t i o n al req u i rem en tth atan ap p el l at e co u rtth en m u st d e c id e w h e th e rto e x e r c is e its d is c r e tio n to n o tic e a f o r f e ite d e rr o r .” I d . W e w ill e xe r c i s e ourdi s c r e t i on t o c orr e c tonl y thos e e rr or s tha t“ s e r i ous l y a f f e c t [ ] the f a i rne s s , i nt e gr i ty orpubl i c r e put a t i on of j udi c i a l pr oc e e di ngs . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. V onn, 535 U . S . 55, 63 ( 2002) ( quot i ng U ni t e d S t a t e s v. O l a no, 507 U . S . 725, 736 (199 3)). W e c an di sc ern n o rea son w hy thi s C i rc ui t ’ s w el l -s ett l ed re qu i re m entof a cont em po ra neou s obj ec t i on t o p re se rve a n evi dent i ary rul i ng for app el l at e r evi ew25

s houl d notappl y he r e . “ [ O ] ne of the f unda m e nt a l purpos e s of the c ont e m por a ne ous obj e c t i on rul e i s t o pr ot e c tj udi c i a l r e s our c e s , i n pa r t i c ul a rby e ns ur i ng tha tthe tr i a l c our t s w i l l ha ve a n oppor tuni ty t o a voi d e rr or s tha tm i ght othe rw i s e ne c e s s i t a t e t i m e - c ons um i ng r e tr i a l . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D a vi d, 83 F . 3d 638, 644- 45 ( 4th C i r . 1996) . A nothe rpurpos e of the c ont e m por a ne ous obj e c t i on ru le is to p r e v e n t c o u n s e l f r o m “‘s a n d b a g g in g ’ th e c o u r ts b y w ith h o ld in g a v a lid o b je c tio n f r o m th e tr ia l c o u r t in o r d e rto o b ta in a n e w tr ia l w h e n th e e rr o ris r e c o g n iz e d o n ap p e a l.” I d . a t 6 4 5 . N e ith e rp u rp o s e w o u ld b e s e r v e d w e r e w e to a c c e ptT urne r ’ s s ugge s t i on tha the rnon- c ont e m por a ne ous a r gum e nt s c onc e rni ng th e B ru to n - v io la tiv e te s tim o n y s u f f ic e d to p r e s e r v e th e is s u e a n d e n title h e rto ha r m l e s s - e rr orr e vi e w . T urne rha d a m pl e oppor tuni ty t o l odge a B rut on obj e c t i on dur i ng the tw o di r e c te xa m i na t i ons a ti s s ue butdi d not . A n obj e c t i on w a s m a de by th e d e f e n s e o n ly th e n e x t d a y , a n d th e n o n ly a f te rth e d is tr ic t c o u r t s u a s p o n te ra i se d the m att er . B y f

ai l i ng t o i nt erpo se a t i m el y obj ec t i on du ri ng the di re ct e xa m i na t i on of

e i the rw i tne s s , the de f

e ns e pr ovi de d the di s tr i c tj udge w i th no t i m e l y oppor tuni ty t o a voi d s e r i ous e rr ortha tm i ghtothe rw i s e ha ve ne c e s s i t a t e d a tim e - c o n s u m in g r e tr ia l. T o d em on stra t e pl ai n err or, the defendantm ustshow thatthere i s “ (1) e rr or, (2) thati s pl ai n and (3) thataf fe ct s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s. If al l three cond i t i on s a re26

m et , an appel l at e c ou rtm ay then exerci se i t s di sc re t i on t o n ot i ce a f orfe i t ed error, butonl y i f

( 4) the e rr ors e r i ous l y a f f e c t s the f a i rne s s , i nt e gr i ty , orpubl i c r e put a t i on of j udi c i a l pr oc e e di ngs . ” M onr oe , 353 F . 3d a t1349 ( i nt e rna l quot a t i ons a nd ci t at i o n s o m i tt ed ). “ W h ere erro rs co u l d h av e cu tei th er w ay an d u n cert ai n ty ex i st s, th e b u r d e n is th e d e c is iv e f a c to rin th e th ir d p r o n g o f th e p la in e rr o rte s t . . . .” U n i t e d St a t e s v . Ro d r i g u e z , 3 9 8 F. 3 d 1 2 9 1 , 1 3 0 0 ( 1 1 th Ci r . ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 5 4 5 U . S. 11 27 (200 5). “ E rr ors do aff ec ta s ub st ant i al ri gh tof a par ty i f they have a ‘s u b s ta n tia l in f

lu e n c e ’ o n th e o u tc o m e o f a c a s e o rle a v e ‘g r a v e d o u b t’ a s to w he the rthe y a f

f e c t e d the out c om e of

a c a s e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. F r a z i e r , 387 F . 3d 1 2 4 4 , 1 2 6 8 n .2 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) ( e n b a n c ) , c e r t. d e n ie d , 5 4 4 U .S . 1 0 6 3 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . A s f o r T u rn er ’s se n ten cin g ch allen g e, w e r ev iew th e d istrict co u rt’s appl i ca t i on of the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes de nov o and i t s und er l yi ng fa ctual fi nd i ng s f

or cl ea r e rr or. U ni t ed S t at es v. P op e, 46 1 F . 3d 13 31 , 13 33 (11t h C i r. 2 0 0 6 ) . A f

t e rth e Su p r e me Co u r t ’ s d e c i s i o n i n U n i t e d St a t e s v . Bo o k e r , 5 4 3 U . S. 22 0 (20 05 ), w e r evi ew the ul t i m at e s ent ence i m po se d for re as on abl enes s. P op e, 461 F . 3d a t1333. II I. F ir s t, T u rn e ra r g u e s th a t th e B ru to n - o f f e n d in g te s tim o n y v io la te d h e rr ig h t to a f a i rtr i a l . I n Bru t o n , tw o d e f e n d a n t s w e r e a c c u s e d o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n th e s a me27

c r i m e a nd tr i e d j oi nt l y . O ne of the de f e nda nt s ha d c onf

e s s e d, na m i ng a nd in c r im in a tin g th e o th e rd e f e n d a n t. T h e tr ia l c o u r t a d m itte d th e c o n f e s s io n in to evi dence w i th a l i m i t i ng i nstruct i on t o the j ury. T he S up re m e C ou rthel d that de s pi t e a l i m i t i ng i ns truc t i on, the a dm i s s i on of a “ pow e r f

ul l y i nc r i m i na t i ng ex traju d icial statem en t” o f a n o n -tes ti fy in g co -d ef en d an t v io lates a d ef

en d an t’ s S i xth A m e ndm e ntr i ghtt o c onf r onta nd c r os s - e xa m i ne a n a dve r s e w i tne s s e . 391 U .S . a t 1 3 5 - 3 6 . A s ta te m e n t is “p o w e r f u lly in c r im in a tin g ” u n d e rB ru to n if it di r e c t l y i m pl i c a t e s the de f e nda nt . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B e a l e , 921 F . 2d 1412, 1425 (11t h C i r. 19 91 ) ( ci t i ng U ni t ed S t at es v. S att er fi el d, 74 3 F . 2d 82 7, 84 9 (11 th C i r. 1984) ) . M or e ove r , the S upr e m e C our tm a de i tc l e a rtha ta l i m i t i ng i ns truc t i on by the di stri ctj ud ge w i l l no tel i m i nat e the prej ud i ci al ef fe ctof the i ntrodu ct i on of a n o n - te s tif

y in g c o - d e f

e n d a n t’s in c u lp a to ry s ta te m e n t. W h ile th e S u p r e m e C o u r t, s i nc e i t s 1968 l a ndm a r k de c i s i on i n B rut on, ha s ha d oc c a s i on t o rul e tha tthe confes si on of a non -t es t i fy i ng co-defe nd antadm i tt ed ata j oi nttri al thathad b ee n re dact ed t o o m i tany r ef er ence t o the defendantdi d n otvi ol at e B rut on , se e R i c ha r ds on v. M a r s h, 481 U . S . 200, 208- 09 ( 1987) ; s e e a l s o G r a y v. M a ry l a nd, 5 2 3 U .S . 1 8 5 ( 1 9 9 8 ) , it h a s n e v e rr e c e d e d f r o m th e b a s ic p r in c ip le e n u n c ia te d in B rut on “ tha ta de f

e nda nti s de pr i ve d of

hi s S i xth A m e ndm e ntr i ghtof c onf r ont a t i on w he n the f

a c i a l l y i nc r i m i na t i ng c onf e s s i on of a nont e s t i f

y i ng28

c o d e f e n d a n t is in tr o d u c e d a t th e irjo in t tr ia l, e v e n if th e ju ry is in s tru c te d to consi der the confess i on on l y a gai nstthe codefendant . ” R i char dson , 48 1 U . S . at 207. Q ui t e obv i ou sl y, bo th P arri sh’ s t es t i m on y a nd T ho rp’ s t es t i m on y vi ol at ed B rut on a nd s houl d ha ve be e n e xc l ude d. D ur i ng P a rr i s h’ s t e s t i m ony , the pr os e c ut or f i r s tpos e d the f

ol l ow i ng que s t i on, w hi c h, a l though a r guabl y i nnoc uous f or B rut on purpos e s , c ont e m pl a t e d a ns w e r s tha tvi ol a t e d B rut on i n l i ghtof the q u e s tio n s th a t f

o llo w e d : “W h a t d id h e [ B r o x to n ] te ll y o u a b o u t a n y in d iv id u a ls i ns i de the pos tof

f i c e ? ” P a rr i s h r e s ponde d, “ tha thi s w i f e w or ke d the r e , . . . a nd, l i ke , he s a y tha tw he n he di d the bur gl a ry , y ou know , l i ke , he ha d c a ughta dude tha tw a s w or ki ng on the ba c k, y ou know , s l e e pi ng, a nd tha t ’ s w he n the dude t ook of f , a nd tha t ’ s w he n he di d w ha the di d, a nd he l e f tbe c a us e s he ge tof

f the ne xt m orni ng a ts e ve n. ” A ppa r e nt l y nots a t i s f i e d w i th thi s r e s pons e , the pr os e c ut or w e nton t o a s k: “ D i d he s a y a ny thi ng a bouthi s w i f e , gi r l f r i e nd’ s r ol e i n the b u r g la ry ? D id s h e h a v e a n y r o le in it o rd o a n y th in g ? ” a n d “D id s h e d o a n y th in g to he l p hi m , gi ve hi m a ny i nf or m a t i on? ” T hi s l i ne of que s t i oni ng i nvi t e d t e s t i m ony th atu n d en i ab l y v i o l at ed B ru t o n . P arri sh resp o n d ed th atT u rn er w o rk ed atth e p o st o ffi ce o n th e n i g h to f th e ro b b ery an d “ l et[B ro x t o n ] k n o w w h ere [th e m o n ey] w a s .” D e s p ite th e B ru to n v io la tio n s , d e f e n s e c o u n s e l f

a ile d to o b

je c t a t a n y p o in t.29

B u tth e p ro secu t o r co n t i n u ed , el i ci t i n g st i l l fu rth er B ru t o n -o ffen d i n g t est i m o n y:

“ D o yo u k n o w w h o l ai d o u t– d i d h e t el l yo u w h o l ai d o u tth e p l an ? ” P arri sh r e s p o n d e d , “S a id h is w if e d id .” D ur i ng T horp’ s t e s t i m ony , the pr os e c ut orpos e d s i m i l a rque s t i ons a nd e lic ite d f u r th e rte s tim o n y th a t v io la te d B ru to n ; a g a in , T u rn e r ’s a tto rn e y f a ile d to o b je c t. A s w ith P a rr is h ’s te s tim o n y , T h o rp ’s te s tim o n y in itia lly d id n o t v io la te B rut on , because i tdi d n otdi re ct l y i m pl i ca t e T urner. T ho rp st at ed, “ I don ’ thave a r e c o lle c tio n o f

e x a c t w o r d s , b u t s o m e th in g a lo n g th e lin e s o f – th a t h im a n d h is unc l e a nd s om e body e l s e ha d r obbe d the pos tof f i c e . ” T he pr os e c ut orthe n a s ke d a q u e s tio n th a t c o u ld y ie ld o n ly B ru to n - o f f e n d in g te s tim o n y : “D id h e [ B r o x to n ] s ta te a ny thi ng a boutw ha thi s w i f e ’ s i nvol ve m e ntw a s ? ” T horp r e s ponde d, “ T ha ts he had g i ven t hem the i nform at i on on ho w t o g o abo uti t . ” A nd then, t o m ake s ure tha tT urne r ’ s r ol e w a s c l e a r , the pr os e c ut ora s ke d the f ol l ow i ng que s t i on, “ D i d he st at e or t el l you w ho w as the organi ze r? ” t o w hi ch T ho rp re pl i ed, “ H i s w i fe , b e c a u s e s h e w a s th e o n e w h o w o r k e d th e r e .” U n d erst an d ab l y, g i v en th e o b v i o u s n atu re o f th e B ru t o n erro rs, b o th si d es a gr e e on appe a l tha tpr ongs one a nd tw o of the pl a i n- e rr ort e s tha ve be e n m e t . T he l i ne of qu es t i on i ng and answ er s unequ i vo ca l l y i nv i t ed and con st i tut ed30

B rut on vi ol a t i ons . A nd w e r e a di l y c onc l ude tha tthe e rr or s w e r e pl a i n, gi ve n the we l l - s e tt l e d n a tu r e o f

th e l a w. T u rn i n g t o th e th i r d p r o n g o f th e p l a i n - e rr o ra n a l y s i s , a s we m u s t , we co n sid erth e e ff

ec t, if an y, o f th e e rr o r o n su b stan ti al rig h ts. It rem ain s T u rn er ’s bu rden t o sho w thatthe B rut on error a ff ec t ed the ou t com e of hertri al -- thati s, that the B rut on error m ade adi ff er ence i n the j ury’ s ver di ct . R od ri gu ez , 39 8 F . 3d at 1300. O n the r e c or d be f or e us , w e c a nnotf

i nd tha ts he ha s m e the rhe a vy bur de n. T he s i m pl e f

a c ti s tha t , i nde pe nde ntof the c ha l l e nge d t e s t i m ony , the g o v e rn m e n t p r e s e n te d o v e rw h e lm in g e v id e n c e in s u p p o r t o f T u rn e r ’s c o n v ic tio n s . F rom the st art , i tw as evi dentthatthe theftof thi s P ostO ff i ce w as an “ i nsi de j ob . ” T urner, as a l on gt i m e post al em pl oyee i n V al do st a, had acce ss t o al l of the re qu i re d i ns i de i nf

or m a t i on, i nc l udi ng the da t e on w hi c h a s i gni f i c a nta m ountof

m one y a nd v a lu a b le s w o u ld b e in th e r e g is try , w h e n th e p o s t o f f ic e w o u ld b e g u a r d e d b y o n ly o n e e m p lo y e e ( a n e ld e r ly e m p lo y e e w ith p o o re y e s ig h t) , a n d th e c o m b in a tio n to th e in te r io rd o o r . I n a d d itio n to h e rin s id e k n o w le d g e , h e rc o n d u c t in th e d a y s im m e d ia te ly f ol l ow i ng the r obbe ry s tr ongl y s uppor t s the c onc l us i on tha ts he w a s a know i ng part i ci panti n the sc hem e. A cc ordi ng t o h erco-w orkers , du ri ng her l at e- ni gh tshi ft th atst art ed j u sto v er an h o u r aft er th e ro b b ery, T u rn er w as “ n erv o u s” an d “ j u m p y”31

and even asked qu es t i on s abo utthe po st al i nv es t i gat ors’ succ es s r at e i n such cas es a n d th e in s p e c to r s ’ a b ility to a c c e s s s u s p e c ts ’ f in a n c ia l r e c o r d s . I n the e a r l y m orni ng on the da y a f t e rthe r obbe ry , T urne re m ba r ke d on a 36- hourr oa d tr i p, w hi c h s he c l a i m e d w a s une xpe c t e d, tr a ve l i ng r ound- tr i p f r om G eorgi a t o N ew Je rs ey vi a M aryl and w i th o nl y tw o v ery bri ef st op s. O ther evi dence s up po rt i ng the j ury’ s gui l ty ver di cti ncl ud es the fa ct s thatT urner’ s a nn ual gross i ncom e w as $3 6, 79 6, she had j ustdecl ar ed bank rupt cy a f ew m on ths before th e th e f t, a n d T u rn e r ’s c h e c k r e g is try “c o n s is te n tly k e p t n e g a tiv e b a la n c e s ” u n til S e p te m b e r7 th , ju s t d a y s a f te rth e th e f

t. I n a ddi t i on, the j ury a l s o he a r d a boutB r oxt on’ s a nd T ur ne r ’ s num e r ous a nd l ar ge ca sh expend i tures soon af t erthe robb ery. N ot abl y, T urner ac com pani ed B r o x to n d u r in g th e a ll- c a s h p u r c h a s e o f th e $ 1 3 ,0 0 0 S u b u rb a n o n S e p te m b e r2 5 th . A l tho ug h she w as no tatthe N ew Je rs ey deal er shi p o n S ept em ber 5th, w hen B r oxt on boughtthe F or d E xpl or e rf or$18, 500 i n c a s h, the j ur y e a s i l y c oul d ha ve i nferre d thatshe knew atl ea stthatthe vehi cl e w as i m prop er l y t i t l ed base d o n h er fa l se st at em ent s duri ng the S ept em ber 22n d tra ff i c s t op of B roxt on , w hen T urner sa i d thather nam e w as “ B re nd a L ynch” a nd thatshe w as the ow ner of the F ord E x p lo r e r .32

M oreover, on O ct ob er6th, i tw as T urner w ho w entt o B roxt on ’ s f orm er a tt orne y ’ s of

f i c e a nd m a de a n a l l - c a s h pa y m e nti n the a m ountof $2, 975 f or out s t a ndi ng f

e e s . W hi l e i ti s notc l e a ri f T urne rw a s a tthe Z a l e s s t or e on S e p te m b e r1 6 th , w h e n B r o x to n p u r c h a s e d a n e n g a g e m e n t r in g f o rT u rn e rw ith c a s h, i ti s qui t e appa r e nttha ts he kne w a boutthe pur c ha s e i t s e l f be c a us e , w he n the po st al i nspect ors c am e t o sea rc h h erho use, she s ai d thatshe w as gett i ng m arri ed and, du ri ng her ow n t es t i m on y, re ca nt ed her cl ai m thatshe c ou l d n otre m em ber r e c e i vi ng the Z a l e s e nga ge m e ntr i ng, i ns t e a d s ugge s t i ng tha ts he ha d r e c e i ve d a di f f e r e ntr i ng f

r om B r oxt on. T h e g o v ern m en tal so p resen t ed su b st an t i al ev i d en ce o b t ai n ed i n th e co u rse of the pos t a l i ns pe c t or s ’ s e a r c h of T urne r ’ s hous e a nd s ubs e que nti nve s t i ga t i on of T u rn e r , d u r in g w h ic h in v e s tig a to r s in s ta lle d a tr a c k in g d e v ic e o n h e rv e h ic le . P erhaps m ostsi gn i fi ca nt , the i nv es t i gat ors di sc ov er ed a backpack, i n the m as t er be dr oom T urne rs ha r e d w i th B r oxt on, onl y pa r t i a l l y w e dge d be tw e e n a m i rr ora nd the w al l and app ar ent l y vi si bl e upo n ent er i ng the room . T he backpack conta i ned $9 , 78 0 i n cas h b ea ri ng no t abl e i nk and m arks consi st entw i th U . S . P ost al S ervi ce st am ps. M oreover, the tra cki ng devi ce pl ac ed on T urner’ s vehi cl e r ef l ec t ed T urne r ’ s num e r ous tr i ps t o the L a ke C i ty s t or a ge uni tbe tw e e n O c t obe r4th a nd33

O c t obe r15th, i nc l udi ng a f t e rhe rhous e w a s s e a r c he d a nd on the a f t e rnoon tha ts he w a s s e r v e d w ith a g r a n d ju ry s u b p o e n a . T he gove rnm e nta l s o pl a y e d s e ve r a l j a i l hous e r e c or di ngs of T ur ne r ’ s a nd B ro x t o n ’ s t el ep h o n e cal l s, i n w h i ch th ey d i scu ssed “ n ev er sayi n g an yth i n g ” ag ai n st e a c h othe r , ope ni ng f

i r e on f e de r a l a ge nt s w ho ha d s e a r c he d T ur ne r ’ s hous e , a nd fl eei n g th e co u n try an d assu m i n g n ew i d en t i t i es. In addi t i on , T urner’ s ow n tri al t es t i m on y, w hi ch w as l ar gel y i ncre di bl e, i nt ernal l y i ncon si st ent , and fl at l y c on tra di ct ed by ot her e vi dence pres ent ed throu gh ou tthe tri al , m ay prop er l y be c on si dere d b y the j ury a nd thi s C ou rtas s u b s ta n tiv e e v id e n c e . I n d e e d , in h is o r d e rd e n y in g T u rn e r ’s m o tio n f o ra n e w tr ia l, the di s tr i c tj udge , w ho ha d the oppor tuni ty t o he a rT urne r ’ s t e s t i m ony a nd obs e r ve her dem ea no r, desc ri bed T urner’ s t es t i m on y a s “ evas i ve, defe nsi ve, oft en c o n tr a d ic to ry , a n d c o m p le te ly la c k in g in c r e d ib ility .” A l th o u g h T u rn er n o w su g g est s th at , w i th o u tth e B ru t o n -o ffen d i n g t est i m o n y, s he c oul d ha ve a r gue d tha ts he unw i tt i ngl y m a y ha ve r e ve a l e d the ne c e s s a ry i ns i de i nf or m a t i on t o B r oxt on, a ttr i a l he rthe or y of de f e ns e w a s tha tne i the rs he nor B r oxt on w e r e i nvol ve d. I nde e d, dur i ng he rt e s t i m ony , T ur ne rm a i nt a i ne d tha ton the ni ghtof

the c r i m e s , B r oxt on w a s hom e f r om 7: 00 p. m . unt i l w he n s he l e f tthe hous e a l i tt l e a f

t e r10: 00 p. m . T urne r ’ s t e s t i m ony pr ovi di ng a n a l i bi f orB r oxt on34

w as com pl et el y i ncon si st entw i th the go vernm ent ’ s a m pl e e vi dence s ho w i ng that he robb ed the po stoffi ce . T u rn e r ’s te s tim o n y a ls o w a s in te rn a lly in c o n s is te n t o n n u m e r o u s p o in ts . T hus , f ore xa m pl e , w he n a s ke d a boutthe j a i l hous e r e c or di ngs of he rt e l e phone c onve r s a t i ons w i th B r oxt on, T urne rf i r s tc l a i m e d tha ts he di d notr e m e m be rha vi ng the conv er sa t i on s. S he then sug gest ed thatshe c ou l d n otre cogn i ze her ow n v oi ce , s i nc e i ts ounde d l i ke he rm othe r ’ s , da ught e r ’ s , a nd s i s t e r ’ s voi c e s . F i na l l y , dur i ng r e di r e c te xa m i na t i on, T urne rpr oc e e de d t o c ha nge thi s t e s t i m ony c onc e rni ng the j a i l hous e r e c or di ngs . S he l i ke w i s e r e c a nt e d he rt e s t i m ony tha ts he c oul d not r e m e m b e rw h e n B r o x to n g a v e h e rth e e n g a g e m e n t r in g .

“ [W ] hen a defendantchoo se s t o t es t i fy , [s ] he runs the ri sk thati f di sbel i eved the j ury m i ghtc onc l ude the oppos i t e of [ he r ] t e s t i m ony i s true . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B r ow n, 53 F . 3d 312, 314 ( 11th C i r . 1995) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a r ks a nd c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . L i ke the de f

e nda nti n B r ow n, T urne rt e s t i f i e d tha ts he ha d no know l e dge of the i l l e ga l c ons pi r a c y a nd a l s o c l a i m e d s he di d notnot i c e a ny thi ng s us pi c i ous dur i ng he re nc ount e r s w i th the othe rc ons pi r a t or s . A s w e obs e r ve d i n B r ow n, “ the ju ry , h e a r in g [ th e d e f

e n d a n t’s ] w o r d s a n d s e e in g [ h e r ] d e m e a n o r , w a s e n title d toThe c ases Tur ner c ites in support of her B ruton claim are inapposite. See , e.g ., United 8 State s v . D oh e rt

y , 2 33 F .3 d 1 27 5, 12 82 (1 1th Cir . 2 00 0) (wherec irc ums tanti al e vide nc eag ains t defendants was limited, Br uton violation was only

direc t evidenceof def

endants’ involvement, and defendants had a

plausible theory

of defense, Bruton testim ony was not harmless); United States v. Ramirez- Perez, 166 F.3d 1106, 1108- 11 (11th Cir. 1999) (where theonly evidenc e ag ainst defendant was his pre sencein a ca

r at the crime scene and the fac t that he had a gun under his seat, a fe deral ag ent’s testimony

that a co- defendant told the defendant to bringthe gun “for protec tion” was the only evidenc e conne ctingthe def endant t o the conspiracy

and thus violated B ruton and wa s not harmless). 35 di sbel i eve [ her] t es t i m on y a nd , i n fac t , t o b el i eve the op po si t e of w hat[s he] sa i d. ” I d. 8 H e r e , the r e w a s ove rw he l m i ng e vi de nc e , apa r tf r om the B rut on- of

f e ndi ng t e s t i m ony , of

T urne r ’ s i nvol ve m e nti n the c ons pi r a c y . M or e ove r , s he putf or th no re m ot el y pl ausi bl e theory of defe nse, offe ri ng on l y tw o w i tness es w ho t es t i fi ed abou ther r eput at i on for hon es ty i n the com m un i ty, and h erow n t es t i m on y, w hi ch w a s h e a v i l y i mp e a c h e d . O n th i s r e c o r d , Tu rn e rh a s n o ts h o w n th a tth e o u t c o me w ou l d h ave been di ff

er entbu tfor the B rut on error, and t hu s thather s ub st ant i al r i ght s w e r e a f

f e c t e d. I n s hor t , s he ha s nots a t i s f i e d he rbur de n on the thi r d pr ong of the pl ai n-error t es t , and t here fore , she has no tes t abl i shed pl ai n err or. I V. W e , lik e w is e , a r e u n p e r s u a d e d b y T u rn e r ’s c h a lle n g e to h e r2 4 0 - m o n th s e nt e nc e . T urne rc l a i m s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tr e l i e d on the B rut on- vi ol a t i ve te s tim o n y c o n c e rn in g h e rp u rp o r te d le a d e r s h ip r o le to im p o s e a n u p w a r d v a r ia n c e .36

T urner al so as se rt s thatthe se nt ence w as un re as on abl e bec ause the j ai l ho use t aper e c o r d in g s d o n o t, a lo n e , s u p p o r t th e s e n te n c e . F r om ourr e vi e w of

the e nt i r e r e c or d, pa r t i c ul a r l y the P S I a nd the tr a ns c r i pt o f th e s e n te n c in g h e a r in g , it is c le a rth a t in im p o s in g s e n te n c e , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id notr e l y on T urne r ’ s purpor t e d l e a de r s hi p r ol e i n the of f e ns e s . F i r s t , the P S I m a de no m e nt i on of

T urne r ’ s l e a de r s hi p r ol e . M or e ove r , a tthe s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng, the g o v er n m en t d irec tl y a sk ed w h eth erth e c o u rt h ad g ra n ted “th e g o v er n m en t’ s m ot i on for tw o t o fou r poi nt s f or l ea der- organi ze r, ” t o w hi ch the di stri ctcourt re spon ded “ N o. ” T here i s no i nd i ca t i on thatthe di stri ctcourti m po se d the up w ar d v a r ia n c e b a s e d o n th e B ru to n - o f f e n d in g te s tim o n y o ro n T u rn e r ’s le a d e r s h ip r o le in the offens e. A s f o rth e r e a s o n a b le n e s s o f th e u ltim a te s e n te n c e im p o s e d , o u rr e v ie w is defe re nt i al , re qu i ri ng us t o “ eval uat e w hether the se nt ence i m po se d b y the di stri ct c our tf a i l s t o a c hi e ve the purpos e s of s e nt e nc i ng a s s t a t e d i n [ 18 U . S . C . §] 35 53 (a ). ” U ni t ed S t at es v. T al l ey , 43 1 F . 3d 78 4, 78 8 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ). T urner be a r s the bur de n of

e s t a bl i s hi ng tha the rs e nt e nc e i s unr e a s ona bl e i n l i ghtof the re cord and t he § 3 55 3(a) se nt enci ng fa ct ors. S ee i d. T he § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors i ncl ud e: the hi s t ory a nd c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s of the de f e nda nt ; the a va i l a bl e s e nt e nc e s ; the appl i c a bl e G ui de l i ne r a nge a nd pol i c y s t a t e m e nt s ; a nd the na tur e a nd37

c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f

th e o f f e n s e . S e e 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t s h o u ld al so consi der the need for the se nt ence (1) t o ref l ec tthe se ri ou snes s of the offens e, p r o m o te r e s p e c t f

o rth e la w , a n d p r o v id e ju s t p u n is h m e n t f o rth e o f f e n s e ; ( 2 ) to a f f or d a de qua t e de t e rr e nc e t o c r i m i na l c onduc t ; ( 3) t o pr ot e c tthe publ i c f r om further c ri m es of the defendant ; and (4) t o p rovi de the defendantw i th n ee ded corr ec t i on al tre atm ent . S ee i d. § 3 55 3(a) (2). W e h a v e e s tab lis h e d a tw o - p a r t p r o c e s s f o rd is tr ic t c o u r ts to u s e in f a s hi oni ng s e nt e nc e s . T a l l e y , 431 F . 3d a t786. F i r s t , the c our tm us tc ons ul ta nd c o rr e c tly d e te r m in e th e a d v is o ry r a n g e p r e s c r ib e d b y th e S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s . Id. S ec on d, t o d et erm i ne a r ea sonabl e s ent ence , the courtm ustconsi der the fa ct ors e num e r a t e d i n 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) . I d. H ow e ve r , the c our tne e d nots t a t e on the r e c o r d th a t it h a s c o n s id e r e d e a c h o f th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s . U n ite d S ta te s v . S c o tt, 42 6 F . 3d 13 24 , 13 29 (11t h C i r. 20 05 ). R ather, an ac kn ow l edgm entby the di stri ct j udge tha the ors he ha s c ons i de r e d the § 3553( a ) f a c t or s w i l l s uf

f i c e . T a l l e y , 431 F . 3d a t786. H er e, the di stri ctcourtexpres sl y s t at ed thati thad con si dere d the § 3 55 3(a) f a c to r s a n d e v e n lis te d s o m e o f th e f a c to r s a n d h o w th e y ap p lie d to T u rn e r ’s c a s e . T he c our the a r d T urne r ’ s m i t i ga t i ng a r gum e nti n f a vorof a s e nt e nc e be l ow the ra ng e, i ncl ud i ng thatT urner had no pri or cr i m i nal hi st ory, thatshe had been38

g a i n f u l l y e mp l o y e d d u r i n g h e ra d u l tl i f e , th a ts h e h a d h o n o r a b l y s e r v e d i n th e U . S. m i l i t a ry , a nd tha ts he w a s the m othe rof f ourc hi l dr e n. D e s pi t e the m i t i ga t i ng e vi de nc e , w hi c h c onc e rne d T urne ra nd he rhi s t or y , s e e 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) ( 1) (e nu m er at i ng as a f

ac t or, “ hi st ory a nd char ac t er i st i cs of the defendant ”) , the di stri ct c our te xpr e s s e d i t s be l i e f tha t , ba s e d on the e vi de nc e i the a r d a ttr i a l , a nd i n l i ghtof th e ju ry v e r d ic t, T u rn e r ’s c r im e s p r e s e n te d “a v e ry s e r io u s m a tte r ,” s e e id . § 3553( a ) ( 2) ( A ) ( e num e r a t i ng the ne e d f orthe s e nt e nc e i m pos e d “ t o r e f l e c tthe se ri ou snes s of the offens e” ), and t hatthe advi sory ra ng e w as “ i nadequ at e. ” I n re ac hi ng thi s c on cl usi on and i m po si ng a 240 -m on th sent ence , the courtadded t hat i tc oul d notdi s m i s s the t e l e phone c a l l s i n w hi c h T ur ne ra nd B r oxt on di s c us s e d the m ur de rof

f e de r a l a ge nt s , a nd the c our tnot e d T urne r ’ s l a c k of r e m or s e , w hi c h the c our tf ound w a s e vi de nc e d by he rs t a t e m e nt s dur i ng the phone c a l l s tha ts he a nd B ro x t o n co u l d fl ee th e co u n try an d assu m e fak e i d en t i t i es. T h e d i stri ctco u rtal so sai d th atth e sen t en ce “ p ro m o t es resp ectfo r th e l aw ” an d “ p ro v i d es j u st pu ni shm enti n thi s c as e. ” M oreover, the courtno t ed thatthe l engt hy se nt ence w as i m pos e d t o pr ovi de a de qua t e de t e rr e nc e , s e e i d. § 3553( a ) ( 2) ( B ) , a nd t o pr ot e c tthe publ i c , s e e i d. § 3553( a ) ( 2) ( C ) . F i na l l y , the c our t ’ s c ons i de r a t i on of the P S I a nd th e p art i es’ arg u m en t s co n cern i n g th e sen t en ce t o b e i m p o sed refl ect s a c o n s id e r a tio n o f

“th e k in d s o f

s e n te n c e s a v a ilab le .” S e e id . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ( 3 ) .39

O n thi s r ec ord, w e c anno tsa y the di stri ctcourt ’ s s ent enci ng ra t i on al e w as un re as on abl e und erB oo ker. T he S ent enci ng G ui del i nes a dv i sory ra ng e w as ca l cul at ed corre ct l y, and t he courtexpres sl y c on si dere d thatra ng e a nd the § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s in im p o s in g s e n te n c e . AF F I RME D.