FI LED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEV ENT H CI RCUI T J UNE 20, 2012 J OHN LEY CLERK [PUBLIS H] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 15 91 2

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 4 :1 0- cr-0 00 01 -RLV-WEJ-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us STEPHEN G. H OUSE, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ern Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (J un e 2 0, 2 01 2) Befo re BARKETT an d P RYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es , andBUCKLEW , Dis tri ctJu dg e. *

Honora ble Susan C. Buc klew, United States Distr i ct J udg e for the Middle District of * Florida , sitti ngby

designation.PRYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg e:

Whe n t he dri ve r of

a m ot orve hi cl e n ot ic es bl ue li gh ts fla sh in g i n the rear vi ew m irr or , th e driv er cann othe lp bu t fe el a se ns e o f dr ead . The p ub li c rep os es a sp eci al tru stin th e p eace off ic ers we em

po wer t o p atro l o urhi gh way s. Th atpo wer in cl ud es th e au th or ity

to di srup t the flo w of m ot orve hi cl e tr affi c, of te n t rav el in g a t hi gh sp eed s, an d t he po wer t o d et ai n adri ve r an d v eh ic le on th e si de of aroa d, whi chcanbe a da ng ero us pl ace. Th is ap pe al in vo lv es a fed eral off ic er wi th li m it edauth or it y

who rep eat ed ly usu rp edth e p owe r to pa tro l traff ic , vi ol at edth e ci vi l ri gh ts of m ot or is ts , abu se d t he publ ic tru st , andli edab ou t i t i n o ffi ci al rep orts . St ep he n G. Ho us e, a fo rm er o ffi cer o f th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce, ap pe al s h is co nv ic ti on s an d s en te nc es foreig htco un ts of wi ll fu ll y de pr iv in g a pe rs on of t he co ns ti tu ti on al rig htto be free f ro m un reas on ab le sei zu re b y

a la w en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, 1 8 U.S.C. § 24 2, an d fo urco un ts of m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts in a m atte r wit hi n t he juri sd ic ti on of afed eral ag en cy , id . § 1 00 1. Ho us e rai se s se ve n i ss ue s o n app eal : (1 ) whe th er the reco rdco nt ai ns su ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o supp ort h is co nv ic ti on s, (2 ) whe th er the di st ric t co urt erredinin st ru ct in g the jury, (3 ) whe th er the di st ric t co urt i m pr op erl y in te rject edit se lf i nt o t he tri al , (4) whet he r th e d is tri ctco urt i m

pr op erl y ex cl ud edev id en ce, (5 ) whe th er the pro se cu to r

2im

pr op erl y co m m en te d o n Ho us e’s de ci si onno t t o t es ti fy , (6) whet he r hi s t ria l co un se l p ro vi de d i ne ffec ti ve ass is tanc e, an d (7 ) whe th er the cum ul at iv e eff

ectof an y erro rs de pr iv edhi m

of afai r tr ia l. The fir sttwo is su es are i nt erre la te d b ecau se th e d is tri ctco urt erredin in st ru ct in g t he jury th ata tr affi c st op is un reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t wh en ev er co nduc te d b y a la w enf or cem en t o ffi cer act in g wi th ou t juris di ct io n o r au th or it y . The Supr em e Co urt h as rul edth ata tr affi c st op is reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t wh ensupp orte d b y pro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n e ve n i f itis in co ns is te ntwith a ge nc y po li cy , Whr en v. Un it edSta te s, 5 17 U.S. 80 6, 8 13 –1 6, 1 16 S. Ct. 1 76 9, 1 77 4– 76 (19 96 ), orst at e la w, Virg in iav. Mo or e, 55 3 U.S. 1 64 , 17 3– 76 , 12 8 S . Ct. 1 59 8, 1 60 5– 07 (20 08 ). The reco rdne ve rth el es s es tabl is he s t ha t thi s erro r is ha rm le ss as t o fo urof Ho us e’s co nv ic ti on s fo r un reas on ab le sei zu res be cau se th e jury dis cred it edHou se ’s acco un ts of p ro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n wh enitco nv ic te d h im of m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts infou r in ci de ntrep orts . W e aff irm fo urof Ho us e’s ei gh t co nv ic ti on s fo r wil lfu l u nr eas on ab le sei zures an d a ffi rm hi s fo urco nv ic ti on s fo r m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts , bu t we v acat e th e rem ai ni ng co nv ic ti on s fo r wil lfu l un reas on ab le sei zu res . All o f Hou se ’s ot he r arg um en ts fai l. We rem an d t hi s m at te r to th e d is tri ctco urt fo r fu rth er p ro ceed in gs co ns is te ntwith t hi s o pi ni on . I. BACKG ROUND

3Beg in ni ng in 19 99 , Ste ph enG. Hou se work edforth e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e

Serv ic e as a la w enf

or cem en t o ffi cer a ndin sp ect or . The Fe de ral Pro te ct iv e Serv ic e is a la w enf

or cem en t ag en cy

with ju ris di ct io n o ve r pr op ert ie s o wne d a nd op erat edby the Gene ral Serv ic es Adm in is tra ti on . As a Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce of fic er, Ho us e wor e a uni fo rm with aba dg e, pa tc he s o n t he un ifo rm id en ti fy in g hi m as afed eral law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, a n am e ta g, an d aut il it y be ltin whi ch he carr ie d ahand gu n, a r ad io , andha nd cu ffs . He als o o pe rat eda m ot orve hi cl e wit h Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce m ark in gs , si ren s, em erg en cy li gh ts on th e ro of

an d i n th e g ril le , anda ph on e num be r li st edon th e rea r. In20 10 , a fed eral grandjury returne d asupe rs ed in g i nd ic tm en t tha t ch arg ed Hou se with e ig htco un ts of d ep riv in g am ot or is t o f th e co ns ti tu ti on al rig htto be free fro m un reas on ab le sei zu re b y

a la w enf or cem en t o ffi cer, 1 8 U.S.C. § 24 2, an d fo urco un ts of m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts in a m at te r wit hi n t he juri sd ic ti on of t he Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce, i d. § 10 01 . Cou nton e ch arg edanun la wfu l traff ic st op of Trum anPad ge tton Ju ly 28, 2 00 6. Co un t two ch arg edanun la wfu l traff ic st op of Trum anPad ge tton Nov em be r 28 , 20 06 . Cou ntth ree c ha rg edanun la wfu l tra ffi c st op of S on y a Car av al ho on Feb ru ary 26 , 20 07 . Cou ntfou r ch arg edan un la wfu l traff

ic st op of An th on y

Riv as on Ju ly 25, 2 00 7. Co un t fi ve ch arg ed subm is si on of a n i nc id en t re po rt c on ta in in g m at eri al ly fals e st at em en ts reg ard in g 4th e st op of R iv as . Cou ntsi x c ha rg edanun la wfu l traff ic st op of J os ep h Ki nn am on t on Apri l 3 0, 2 00 8. Co un t s ev ench arg edanun la wfu l traff ic st op of Da vi s Wib el on Decem

be r 3, 2 00 8. Co un t ei gh t ch arg edsubm is si on of a n i nc id en t re po rt co nt ai ni ng m at eri al ly fals e st at em en ts reg ard in g t he st op of Wib el . Cou ntni ne ch arg edanun lawfu l at te m pt edtra ffi c st op of Da ni el McFa rlandonJanua ry 9, 20 09 . Cou ntten ch arg edsubm is si on of a n i nc id en t re po rt c on ta in in g m at eri al ly fal se st at em en ts reg ard in g t he st op of M cFar la nd . Cou ntele ve n c ha rg edan un la wfu l traff

ic st op of R eg in al d Th om ps on on Apri l 1 5, 2 00 9. Co un t twelv e ch arg edsubm is si on of a n i nc id en t re po rt c on ta in in g m at eri al ly fals e st at em en ts reg ard in g t he st op of Th om ps on . Im m ed ia te ly after t he jury was adm in is te redit s o ath a t Ho us e’s tr ia l, the di st ric t co urt ex pl ai ne d t o t he m th atitwou ldch arg e th em ab ou t the law af

te r th e pr es en ta ti on of t he ev id en ce. The co urt al so in st ru ct edth e jury, “ Don ’t st art m ak in g up you r m in d abo utth e g ui ltor i nn oc en ce o f th e d efen da ntun ti l you h av e he ardth e who le cas e. W e h av e a b adhabi t as hu m anbe in gs of l et ti ng fir st im pr es si on s co nt ro l wh atwe th in k abo utso m ethi ng . W ai t u nt il y ouhe ar i t al l.” At tria l, the go ve rn m en t p res en te d t es ti m on y fro m sev eral cu rren t an d fo rm er o ffi cers of t he Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce ab ou t the li m it at io ns im po se d up on th ei r au th or it y

by agen cy

po li cy an d abo utHou se ’s hi st ory of v io la ti ng th at 5po li cy . The o ffi cers tes ti fie d t ha t ag en cy po li cy pro hi bi te d o ffi cers fro m co nduc ti ng tra ffi c st op s fo r m in ortra ffi c v io la ti on s o ut si de of f ed eral pro pe rty in th e St at e o f Geo rg ia . Agen cy po li cy li ke wis e p ro hi bi te d o ffi cers fro m act iv at in g th e em erg en cy

li gh ts onth ei r ve hi cl es ou ts id e o f fed eral pro pe rty, exce ptin res po ns e to a li fe-t hr eat en in g e m erg en cy , whi le inho t p ur su itof afel on , or wi th pr io r ap pr ov al fro m

a Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce M eg a Cen te r Ope rat oror a supe rv is or . Age nc y po li cy requi redoff

ic ers who co nduc te d atra ffi c st op or a ct iv at ed th e em erg en cy

li gh ts onth ei r ve hi cl es to subm itanin ci de ntrep ort o n anu m be red ag en cy form , Gene ral Serv ic es Adm in is tra ti onFo rm 31 55 . Dewayne Andrews , a Reg io na l Di rect or , tes ti fie d t ha t i t was im po rtantfor

off ic ers to be tru th fu l i n t he rep orts , bo thbe cau se th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce u se d t he rep orts in de te rm in in g wh ethe r anoff ic er’s u se of h is em erg en cy li gh ts was p erm is si bl e an d be cau se othe r la w enf

or cem en t ag en ci es us edth e rep orts in cri m in al pro se cu ti on s. Ru ss el l Di ng m an , a Sen io r In st ru ct oran d P ro gr am Man ag er atth e Fed eral Law Enfo rcem en t Trai ni ng Cen te r, al so tes ti fie d t ha t i t was im po rtantth ata rep ort in cl ud e trut hf

ul in fo rm at io n re gard in g “ al l o f th e fac ts of t he cas e, th e who , what , whe n, wh ere, an d h ow o f th e cas e.” Din gm anex pl ai ne d t ha t o th er ag en ci es us ed th e rep orts in de ci di ng whet he r to in it ia te cri m in al pro se cu ti on s, an d h e te st ifi ed 6th atfal se st at em en ts ina rep ort co ul d ru in an y cas e anag en cy

att em pt edto pu rs ue ba se d upo n e ve nt s d es cri be d i n t ha t re po rt. Thre e o ffi cers als o t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e h adbe enrep rimand edab ou t vi ol at in g a ge nc y

po li cy reg ard in g t raff

ic st op s o n s ev eral oc cas si on s dur in g h is care er wi th th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce. And rews ; J oh n C urti s Gl ynn , Jr., a fo rm er Di st ric t Di rect or ; an d S hi rle y Reed , a Ris k M an ag em en t Br an ch Ch ie f, each tes ti fie d abo utpe rs on al ly exp la in in g t o Ho us e th athi s au th or it y di d n ot en co m pa ss st op pi ng m ot or is ts form in ortra ffi c v io la ti on s o ut si de fed eral pro pe rty. Glynn t es ti fie d t ha t h e h adpre pa reda writ te n re pr im an d o f Hou se forco nduc ti ng a tra ffi c st op witho utau th or it y , bu t tha t h e h adno t d el iv eredth e rep rimandaft er m eet in g wi th Hou se an d warni ng hi m ab ou t ag en cy

po li cy reg ard in g t raff

ic st op s. Glynn e xp la in edth athi s m ai n c on cern ha d b eenth atHou se un de rs to odth e p ol ic y an d re co gn iz edth atvi ol at in g t ha t p ol ic y “ co ul d l eadto a m or e se ve re ac ti on by [th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce].” Reedtes ti fie d t ha t, af te r sh e h adrece iv eda rep ort tha t Ho us e h adco nduc te d atra ffi c st op witho utau th or it y , sh e sp ok e wit h Hou se to en su re tha t h e und ers to odag en cy po li cy reg ard in g t raff

ic st op s. And rews tes ti fie d t ha t h e rec ei ve d n ot ic e o f anin te rn al ag en cy in ve st ig at io n o f Hou se pre m is edup on all eg at io ns th atHou se ha d c on du ct edtra ffi c st op s wi th ou t au th or it y , andth atHou se ’s rig htto dri ve hi s l aw en fo rcem en t v eh ic le ho m e fro m 7work was tem po rari ly sus pe nd edbe cau se of t ha t i nv es ti ga ti on . Andrews st at ed th athe ha d p ers on al ly tol d Ho us e th at“ he ha d t o s to p” co nduc ti ng tra ffi c st op s fo r m in ortra ffi c v io la ti on s o ut si de fed eral pro pe rty andth athe ha d s pe ci fic al ly in st ru ct edHou se th at , eve n i n s itua ti on s wh ere Ho us e b el ie ve d h e was th e ta rg et of roa d ra ge by oth er driv ers , age nc y po li cy requi redhi m

to all ow l oc al au th or it ie s to res ol ve th e m at te r. Dur in g t he ex am in at io n o f Ree d, t he pro se cu to r as ke d h er, “ If [Fe de ral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce o ffi cers ] ha ve pro babl e cau se to m ak e a traff ic st op , th ey

are vi ol at in g t he civ il rig ht s o f th e m ot or is ts ? ” Ree d a ns weredin th e aff irmativ e, an d Hou se ob jecte d a ndass ert ed , “ Tha t’s n ottru e.” The di st ric t co urt re pl ie d, “ It i s to o. It ’s go t s om e if’s andan d’s t o i t. We are ge tt in g t o t he if p art . I th in k youare fara fie ld[si c].” The d is tri ctco urt the n s us ta in edHou se ’s ob jecti on . Hou se di d no t o bjec t t o t he di stric t ju dg e’s co m m en t, an d h e d idno t re qu es t a co nt em po ran eo us li m it in g i ns tru ct io n a s t o e ithe r th e p ro se cu to r’s qu es ti on , Ree d’s re sp on se , or t he jud ge ’s comm en t. No t l on g a fte r th e d is tri ctco urt su st ai ne d Ho us e’s ob

jecti on , th e p ro se cu to r as ke d R eed , “ If [Fe de ral Pro te ct iv e Serv ic e o ffi cers ] have pro babl e cau se an d t he y do de ta in th e in di vi du al , th ey ha ve do ne so m ethi ng un lawfu l? ” Ree d a ns wered , “ Co rrec t.” Ho us e d idno t o bjec t t o

8th e p ro se cu to r’s qu es ti onor R eed ’s res po ns e, no r di d h e reque sta li m it in g

in st ru ct io n a s t o e it he r. The go ve rn m en t al so pre se nt edtes ti m on y fro m th e se ve n m ot or is ts who se ci vi l ri gh ts Hou se was c ha rg edwith v io la ti ng . Thes e m ot or is ts tes ti fie d abo ut th ei r en co un te rs with Ho us e. Inad di ti on , th e m ot or is ts who se en co un te rs with Hou se were re co rd edin th e in ci de ntrep orts de sc rib edin th e in di ct m en t t es ti fie d ab ou t the ass ert io ns in Hou se ’s rep orts . Pad ge tttes ti fie d t ha t, o n J ul y 28 , 20 06 , he was si tt in g i n h is ve hi cl e ata red li gh t wai ti ng to tu rnlef

t wh enhe ob se rv edHou se ap pr oa ch qu ic kl y fro m th e rea r in a bl ack , un m ark edve hi cl e an d p ul l i nt o the lan e b eh in d P ad ge tt . Whe n the li gh t tu rn edgre en , Pad ge tttu rn edlef t an d t he n p ro ceed edforwardin th e ri gh t l an e o f a fo ur -la ne roa d, wi th Hou se fol lo win g c lo se ly beh in d h im . Hou se ev en tu al ly pa ss edPad ge ttan d t he n m ov edba ckin to th e ri gh t l an e in fro ntof P ad ge tt . Whe n a v eh ic le in fro ntof Ho us e sl owe d t o m ak e a turn, Ho us e, fo ll owe d b y Pad ge tt , m ov edin to th e le ft l an e. Hou se th enap pl ie d h is bra ke s an d abr up tl y bro ug hthi s ve hi cl e to a st op forno ap pa ren t re as on , for ci ng Pad ge ttto sl am hi s b rak es to av oi d h it ti ng th e rea r of

Hou se ’s veh ic le . Hou se th enall owe d P ad ge ttto pa ss hi m , pu ll edbe hi ndPad ge tt , andact iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts . Pad ge tttes ti fie d t ha t he ha d n otex ceed edth e sp eedli m it , hadpro pe rly sig na le d b efo re m ak in g e ach 9la ne ch an ge , hadno t fo ll owe d a no th er v eh ic le to o c lo se ly, an d h adno t cu t o ff

an ot he r ve hi cl e whi le ch an gi ng lan es , bu t h e b el ie ve d h e was leg al ly obl ig at edto st op be cau se a la w enf

or cem en t o ffi cer h adord eredhi m to do so . Afte r Pad ge ttpu ll edhi s v eh ic le ov er, Ho us e ap pr oa ch edPad ge tt ’s veh ic le in un ifo rm

with h is handon hi s p is to l. Ho us e y el le d a t Pa dg et t, s ay in g t ha t Pad ge ttwas “ ab ou t t o g etwhat[he ] de se rv ed ” an d t ha t Ho us e h adcal le d 9 11 . Hou se th enreturne d t o h is ve hi cl e, an d Ho us e an d P ad ge ttwait ed45 m in ut es for lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers to arri ve . Pad ge ttdi d n otfeel th athe was fr ee t o le av e b ecau se Hou se st il l h adhi s l ig ht s o n a ndha d t ol d P ad ge ttth atlo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers were o n t he ir wa y . W he n t he lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers arri ve d, t he y

li st en edto bo th Hou se ’s andPad ge tt ’s acco un ts of t he in ci de ntan d th enis su edPad ge tta ci ta ti on forag gr es si ve dri vi ng . Pad ge tthi reda la wy er t o co nt es t the ag gr es si ve dri vi ng ch arg e. Pad ge ttan d h is lawyer att en de d s ix to eig ht co urt h eari ng s i n re la ti on to th e ch arg e o ve r a two- y ear p eri od , bu t Ho us e n ev er ap pe aredto tes ti fy . The ch arg e was ev en tu al ly dis m is se d. Pad ge tttes ti fie d t ha t, o n No ve m be r 28 , 20 06 , he was dri vi ng 68 m il es pe r ho urinth e le ft l an e o f a fo ur -la ne roa d wh ere t he sp eedli m itwas 6 5 m il es pe r ho urwhenhe ob se rv edHou se ’s bl ackve hi cl e ap pr oa ch in g h im fro m be hi ndat a hi gh rat e o f sp eed . Hou se sp edaro un d P ad ge ttin th e ri gh t l an e an d t he n m ov ed 10ba ckin to th e le ft l an e in fro ntof P ad ge tt , narro wly m is si ng hi s fr on t b um pe r an d fo rci ng hi m

off th e ro adway . Hou se cau se d P ad ge ttto dri ve off th e ro ad ; i f Pad ge ttha d n otst op pe d h is ve hi cl e, he wou ldha ve hi t Ho us e’s ve hi cl e. Hou se st op pe d h is ve hi cl e 2 5 t o 3 0 fe etin fro ntof P ad ge tt ’s veh ic le , andbo th Pad ge tt an d Ho us e le ft t he ir v eh ic le s. Hou se was wea rin g aun ifo rm an d c arrying a pi st ol , andPad ge ttreco gn iz ed Hou se as t he off

ic er wh o h adpu ll edhi m

ov er the pre vi ou s Jul y . Hou se y el le d a t Pad ge tt , saying th atwhen a ve hi cl e ap pr oa ch es fro m be hi nd , Pad ge ttsh ou ldm ov e ou t o f th e way . The en co un te r la st edten m inut es , aft er wh ic h Ho us e dro ve away . Pad ge ttbe li ev edhe was d et ai ne d dur in g t ho se ten m in ut es be cau se “ whe n so m eb od y

run s you o ff the roa d a t a h ig h ra te of s pe ed , andth ey are dres se d i n a po li ce u ni fo rm , th ey

are d et ai ni ng y ou .” Afte r Hou se lef t, Pa dg et t ca ll ed91 1 be cau se he fear edth atHou se ha d n o re ga rdforan y on e’s sa fety . So nya Carav al ho tes ti fie d t ha t, o n F eb ru ary 26 , 20 07 , sh e was dri vi ng in th e le ft l an e o n In te rs ta te 75 when sh e o bs erv edHou se ap pr oa ch he r fro m be hi ndin a bl ack , un m ark edve hi cl e ata ve ry hi gh rat e o f sp eed . Carav al ho m ov edin to th e cen te r la ne to all ow Ho us e to pa ss he r, th enreturne d t o the lef t l an e. As Ho us e dr ov e p as t h er, Car av al ho ob se rv edth athe was wea rin g aun ifo rm . She th en ob se rv edHou se dri vi ng erra ti cal ly, fla sh in g h is li gh ts at v eh ic le s i n fr on t o f hi m 11an d s lam

m in g h is bra ke s, an d s he m ov edba ckin to th e cen te r la ne be cau se sh e was afra idHou se was g oi ng to run in to an ot he r ve hi cl e. Afte r Car av al ho returne d t o th e cen te r la ne , Hou se sl amm edhi s b rak es an d a ll owe d C arav al ho to pa ss hi m . Hou se th enm ov edbe hi ndhe r, act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts , anddi rect edhe r to pu ll ov er. Car av al ho di d n otbe li ev e sh e h adany ch oi ce b utto st op be cau se a la w en fo rcem en t o ffi cer h addi rect edhe r to pu ll ov er. Car av al ho in it ia ll y tes ti fie d t ha t, to he r kn owl ed ge , sh e h addo ne no th in g t o m eri t b ei ng pu ll edov er; sh e h ad rem ai ne d a t l eas t a c ar’s l en gt h o r m or e b eh in d Ho us e’s ve hi cl e an d h adno t fo ll owe d Ho us e’s ve hi cl e to o c lo se ly. On cr os s- ex am in at io n s he co nc ed edth at sh e m ay ha ve be endri vi ng sl ig ht ly ove r th e sp eedli m it , th ou gh th ere wer e ve hi cl es in fro ntof h er g oi ng fas te r th ansh e was . Afte r Car av al ho pu ll edov er h er v eh ic le , Hou se ap pr oa ch edhe r win do w, y el le d a t h er, s ay in g s he sh ou ldno t fo ll ow a f ed eral ag en t, t ol d h er tha t h e was go in g t o c al l the Geor gi a St at e Pat ro l, t oo k h er driv er’s l ic en se , andreturne d t o h is ve hi cl e. Cara va lh o d idno t b el ie ve sh e was free to lea ve . After 1 0 t o 1 5 m in ut es , Hou se returne d t o C arav al ho ’s veh ic le , to ldhe r th ere wer e n o s ta te off ic ers av ai labl e, an d re tu rn edhe r dr iv er’s l ic en se to he r. Hou se di d n otis su e Car av al ho a ci ta ti on or a rres t h er. Hou se fil eda writ te n re po rt abo uthi s traff ic st op of Cara va lh o, i n wh ic h h e st at edth atCara va lh o h adbe endri vi ng reck le ss ly befo re h e 12st op pe d h er. Car av al ho tes ti fie d t ha t the rep ort co nt ai ne d n um ero us fal se

st at em en ts . Lee An th on y

Riv as tes ti fie d t ha t, o n J ul y 27 , 20 07 , he was dri vi ng no m or e th an15 to 20 m il es pe r ho urin th e la ne im m ed ia te ly adjacen t t o t he far l eftlan e o n In te rs ta te 75 du rin g h eav y rus h h ou r tr affi c. Inan ti ci pa ti on of m erg in g i nt o t he le ft l an e, Ri va s ac ti va te d h is tu rnsi gn al an d c he ck edfortra ffi c in hi s re arv ie w and si de m irr or s; he no ti cedHou se in th e le ft l an e driv in g abl ack , un m ark edve hi cl e, po si ti on edfar en ou gh be hi ndRiv as ’s veh ic le th atRiv as be li ev edhe co ul d s afel y m erg e in fro ntof Ho us e. Riv as m erg edin to th e le ft l an e in fro ntof Ho us e, at whi chpo in t Ho us e acc el erat edto wardRiv as ’s veh ic le an d t he n abrup tl y ap pl ie d hi s b rak es , fla sh edhi s h ead li gh ts , andho nk edhi s h orn. Ho us e th enm erg edon to th e le ft s ho ul de r of

th e ro ad , pu ll edup be si de Riv as , rol le d d own hi s wi nd ow, an d accu se d R iv as of c ut ti ng hi m off . After R iv as de ni edHou se ’s accu sa ti on , Hou se to ldRiv as to pu ll ov er, an d Ho us e act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts . Riv as pu ll ed in to th e le ft l an e b eh in d Ho us e. Riv as was c ert ai n tha t h e h adno t v io la te d a ny tra ffi c la ws, b utth e fac t tha t Ho us e h adem erg en cy li gh ts on hi s v eh ic le ledRiv as to be li ev e h e was leg al ly obl ig at edto st op . Afte r Ri va s p ul le d o ve r, Hou se ap pr oa ch edRiv as ’s car i n u ni fo rm , hi s de m ean orsu gg es ti ng th athe “ wan te d t o p un ch [Ri va s] inth e fac e,” an d t ol d R iv as 13in a “ ve ry

sca ry vo ic e” tha t h e was a fed eral ag en t an d t ha t h e “ was go in g t o g et [Ri va s] forde st ru ct io n o f go ve rn m en t p ro pe rty.” Riv as tes ti fie d t ha t h e n ev er cam e cl os e to st rik in g Ho us e’s ve hi cl e wit h h is own . Riv as cal le d 9 11 , andth e op erat orto ldhi m

th atHou se ha d c al le d l oc al law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers . Riv as di d no t b el ie ve th athe was fr ee t o l eav e. Whe n the lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers arri ve d, t he y

to ldRiv as he was fr ee t o g o; th ey ne it he r arre st edRiv as no r is su ed hi m a ci ta ti on . Riv as ha d wai te d o n t he si de of t he roa d fo r 45 min ut es . Dur in g h is di rectex am in at io n o f Ri va s, the pro se cu to r subm it te d i nt o ev id en ce the in ci de ntrep ort Ho us e h adfil edreg ard in g Ho us e’s en co un te r wit h Ri va s. Ho us e st at edinth e rep ort tha t Ri va s h adm erg edin to th e far lef t l an e o f In te rs ta te 75 in fro ntof Ho us e’s ve hi cl e an d h ad“ jam m edon hi s b rak es ”; th at Ri va s h adsp unsi de way s i n fr on t o f Hou se an d fo rcedHou se to “br ak e[] hard ” an d to ve er i nt o t he em erg en cy lan e to av oi d s tri ki ng Riv as ’s veh ic le ; tha t Ho us e h ad act iv at edhi s b lu e li gh ts to pre ve ntot he r tr affi c fro m st rik in g h im , at wh ic h p oi nt Ri va s h adpu ll edin to th e em erg en cy lan e; th atHou se ha d re m ai ne d o n t he hi gh way , rol le d d own hi s wi nd ow, an d a dv is edRiv as to dri ve m or e car efu ll y ; tha t Ri va s h ad“ co nt in ue d driv in g i n t he em erg en cy lan e” an d h adswerve d t owa rd Hou se ’s go ve rn m en t v eh ic le twi ce, n earl y st rik in g t he go ve rn m en t v eh ic le ; an d th atHou se ha d t he n a ct iv at edhi s b lu e li gh ts , pu ll edov er, ap pr oa ch edRiv as ’s 14ve hi cl e an d t ol d R iv as th athe ha d c al le d l oc al law en fo rcem en t. The pro se cu to r

ga ve Riv as a co py of th e rep ort t o re fere nc e whi le th e p ro se cu to r qu es ti on edhi m . Ri va s t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e’s rep ort was fal se . Riv as tes ti fie d t ha t h e h adno t

“ jam [m ed ] on hi s b rak es ” imm ed ia te ly after m ov in g i nt o t he lef t l an e infro ntof Hou se ; tha t h e h adno t l os t co nt ro l o f hi s ca r orsp un si de way s i n fr on t o f Hou se ; th athi s v eh ic le was n ev er s id eways inth e lane ; tha t h e h adpu ll edin to th e em erg en cy

lan e o nl y aft er Ho us e act iv at edhi s b lu e li gh ts to “pu ll [hi m ] ov er”; th at Hou se ha d n otrem ai ne d o n t he hi gh way aft er h e act iv at edhi s b lu e li gh ts ; an d t ha t he ha d n otdri ve n i n the em erg en cy lan e, swe rv edto wardHou se ’s veh ic le , or ne arl y stru ckHou se ’s veh ic le . Jo se ph Kin nam on t t es ti fie d t ha t, o n Ap ril 30 , 20 08 , he was dri vi ng in th e le ft l an e o n In te rs ta te 75 , pas si ng tra ct or tra il er tru ck s t ha t wer e tr av el in g i n t he m id dl e an d ri gh t l an es , when Hou se ap pr oa ch edhi m fro m be hi ndat ave ry

hi gh rat e o f sp eedin a m ark edlaw en fo rcem en t v eh ic le . Hou se m an euve redhi s v eh ic le wit hi n fo urto fiv e fee t o f Kin na m on t’s v eh ic le an d fl as he d h is he ad li gh ts . Kin nam on t u nd ers to odth atHou se want edto pa ss hi m , bu t wi th a tr act ortra il er o n on e si de of h im

an d agu ardrai l o n t he ot he r, Kin na m on t co ul d n otm ov e o utof th e la ne . Kin na m on t b el ie ve d t ha t h e “ ha d t o b e g oi ng ov er the sp eedli m itto be pa ss in g t he tra ct or

tra il ers ,” bu t h e was no t driv in g a gg res si ve ly. Hou se was 15dr iv in g qui ck ly eno ug h t o “ cat ch [] [Kinn am on t] li ke [Kin nam on t] was s tand in g

st il l.” Afte r Kin na m on t p as se d t he tra ct ortra il ers , Hou se act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts , sl owe d h is ve hi cl e, an d b eg an“ es co rti ng ” Kin na m on t t o t he si de of t he ro ad . As Kin na m on t was sl owi ng hi s v eh ic le to a st op on th e sh ou ld er o f th e ro ad , Hou se tu rn edoff

hi s emergen cy

li gh ts an d s pe d away . Kin na m on t d eci de d t o rep ort Ho us e, so he m erg edba ckon to th e ro adan d a ccel erat ed , inanatt em ptto cat ch Hou se ’s veh ic le an d re co rdth e p ho ne nu m be r li st edon th e rea r. As Kin nam on t ap pr oa ch edHou se ’s veh ic le , Kinna m on t fl as he d h is he ad li gh ts in an at te m ptto cau se Hou se to sl ow d own , bu t Ki nn am on t re m ai ne d s om ewh ere be twee n 1 00 an d 2 00 y ard s b eh in d Ho us e, an d Ki nn am on t d idno t driv e fas te r th an th e p os te d s pe edli m it . Hou se th endro ve on to th e sh ou ld er o f th e ro adan d st op pe d h is ve hi cl e, an d o nc e Kin na m on t caug htup to Hou se , Kin na m on t s to pp ed hi s o wn v eh ic le be hi ndHou se ’s. Hou se st ep pe d o utof h is ve hi cl e wit h h is ha ndon hi s re vo lv er, ap pe ari ng

“ ex tre m el y

an gry ,” an d a sk edKin na m on t wh athi s p ro bl em was. When Kin nam on t t ol d Ho us e th athe in te nd edto fil e a co m pl ai ntag ai ns t Ho us e, Hou se be cam e “ m adas aho rn et ,” to ldKin na m on t tha t h e was go in g t o re st ric t Kin nam on t’s m ov em en t, b ack edhi s v eh ic le on to Int ers ta te 75 in on co m in g t raff ic , 16an d t he n p ul le d h is ve hi cl e o ve r be hi ndKin nam on t’s v eh ic le . Kin na m on t the n

cal le d 9 11 . After p ark in g b eh in d Ki nn am on t, Ho us e in fo rm edKin na m on t tha t h is m ov em en t was res tri ct ed , andth atHou se ha d s umm on edlo cal law en fo rcem en t. Kin nam on t d idno t b el ie ve he was fr ee t o g o b ecau se Hou se ha d t ol d h im hi s m ov em en t was res tri ct edan d b ecau se Hou se ha d aba dg e an d agu n. Whe n t he lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers arri ve d, t he y qu es ti on edHou se an d Kin nam on t, an d Ki nn am on t t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e p ro vi de d afal se acco un t o f th e en co un te r. The l oc al law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers arre st edKin na m on t, ch arg edhi m wit h a gg res si ve dri vi ng , im pe di ng th e fl ow o f tr affi c, an d fo ll owi ng to o c lo se ly, im po un de d h is car, an d t oo k h is dri ve r’s li cen se . Kin nam on t was rel eas edfro m jail fiv e h ou rs lat er, an d t he ch arg es ag ai ns t h im were ev en tu al ly dro pp ed . Hou se fil eda writ te n re po rt o f hi s en co un te r wit h Ki nn am on t, i n wh ic h h e al le ge d tha t Kin nam on t h adbe endri vi ng reck le ss ly at th e ti m e o f th e en co un te r. Kin na m on t te st ifi edth atth e rep ort co nt ai ne d n um ero us fal se st at em en ts . Dur in g t he pro se cu to r’s di rectex am in at io n o f Kin nam on t re ga rd in g t he ch arg es fil edag ai ns t h im , Kinna m on t t es ti fie d t ha t the ch arg es ha d b een di sm is se d, an d Ho us e o bjec te d o n t he ba si s t ha t Ki nn am on t was “ go in g t o e xp la in why the ch arg es were dro pp ed .” Inres po ns e to Hou se ’s ob jecti on , th e d is tri ct co urt s ai d t o t he pro se cu to r, “ W e wil l g etth e co urt re co rd s an d s ee wh y th ey were 17dr op pe d, i f y oudo n’t h av e th em .” The p ro se cu to r rep li ed , “ I do n’t h av e th os e

reco rd s.” Th e d is tri ctco urt the n s ta te d, “ W e wil l h av e th em be fo re the tri al is ov er. I th in k t he jury ne ed s t o kno w.” Hou se di d n otob ject. Th e g ov ern m en t la te r in tro du cedth e rec or ds in to ev id en ce, an d Ho us e ex pl ic it ly stat edth athe ha d

“ [n ]o ob jecti on ” to th ei r in tro du ct io n. Dav is W ib el tes ti fie d t ha t h e tu rn edlef t i nt o t he lef

t l an e o f a fo ur

lan e ro ad aro un d 5 :3 0 a .m . onDecem be r 3, 2 00 8. Th ere was no tra ffi c o n t he roa d wh en W ib el m ad e th e tu rn . As W ib el was a ccel erat in g up t o t he sp eedli m it , Hou se ap pe aredbe hi ndhi m

in a go ve rn m en t v eh ic le an d b eg an“ ta il ga ti ng ” h is ve hi cl e, al th ou gh th ere was no tra ffi c in th e ri gh t l an e. W ib el m ov edin to th e ri gh t l an e to al lo w Hou se to pa ss hi m , bu t Ho us e d idno t p as s h im . As th e two ve hi cl es tra ve le d d own th e ro ad , Hou se retreat edtwo to th ree c ar l en gt hs be hi ndW ib el , at whi chpo in t Wib el m erg edin to th e le ft l an e to pa ss a ve hi cl e tr av el in g i n the rig ht la ne . Hou se th ensp edup an d “ go t i n b eh in d” W ib el , “ rig hton[W ib el ’s] bu m pe r.” W ib el m erg edba ckin to th e ri gh t l an e, bu t ag ai n Ho us e d idno t p as s h im . To av oi d t ro ub le , W ib el reduc edhi s s pe ed , andHou se th enpa ss edhi m . Whe n Ho us e was two to th ree c ar l en gt hs in fro ntof Wib el , W ib el m erg edba ckin to th e le ft la ne . Hou se th ensl amm edhi s b rak es , for ci ng W ib el to m erg e b ackin to th e ri gh t la ne to av oi d h it ti ng Hou se ’s veh ic le . W ib el ha d n otfol lo wedHou se to o c lo se ly 18ordri ve n a gg res si ve ly, an d t he re was no ot he r tr affi c o n t he roa d a ndno ap pa ren t

reas onforHou se to ha ve ap pl ie d h is bra ke s. Wibe l t oo k Ho us e’s co nduc t as “ an actto ward[hi m ]”; he was s care d a ndsp edup in anatt em ptto “pu t d is ta nc e be twee n” hi m se lf andHou se , bu t h e n ev er g otso far ah eadof Ho us e th athe lo st si gh t o f Hou se be hi ndhi m . A sh ort t im e la te r, a lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer a ct iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts to st op W ib el , at wh ic h p oi ntHou se act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts , and W ib el , th e lo cal off

ic er, an d Ho us e al l s to pp edth ei r ve hi cl es on th e si de of t he ro ad . W ib el ha d n otvi ol at edan y tra ffi c la ws an d was no t driv in g a gg res si ve ly. On d ire ctex am in at io n, Wib el tes ti fie d t ha t h e b el ie ve d h e was ob li ga te d t o s to p hi s v eh ic le be cau se two law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers were p ul li ng hi m ov er, b uton cro ss ex am in at io n, h e te st ifi edth atitwas the lo cal off ic er, n otHou se , who cau se d hi m to st op . The l oc al off

ic er que st io ne d Ho us e an d Wib el , andW ib el tes ti fie d th atHou se ga ve th e lo cal off ic er a fa ls e acc ou ntof t he ev en ts th atha d t ran sp ire d be twee n the m . The l oc al off ic er arres te d Wib el an d c harg edhi m with a gg res si ve dr iv in g. Wibe l was rel eas edfro m jail sev eral ho ur s l at er. He p le ad edno lo co nt en de re t o the ag gr es si ve dri vi ng ch arg e b ecau se he was t ol d i t wo ul d c os t m or e m on ey

to di sp ut e it . Jo hn Beal , th e lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer wh o arre st edW ib el , tes ti fie d t ha t Ho us e h adbe en“ in si st en t upo n h av in g [Wib el ] 19arre st ed ” an d t ha t Ho us e h adledBeal to be li ev e th atHou se was acert ifi edpe ace

of fic er i n t he Sta te of Ge or gi a. Infact , alt ho ug h Ho us e h adbe encert ifi edas a pe ace o ffi cer i n 1 98 4, h is cert ifi cat io n was rev ok edin 19 92 an d was ne ve r ren ewed . Dur in g h is di rectex am in at io n o f W ib el , th e p ro se cu to r subm it te d i nt o ev id en ce the in ci de ntrep ort Ho us e h adfil edreg ard in g Ho us e’s en co un te r wit h W ib el . Hou se st at edin th e rep ort tha t Wib el ha d a ccel erat edto pre ve ntHou se fro m pa ss in g h im ; tha t Wib el ha d d riv enso fas t tha t Ho us e h adlo stsi gh t o f W ib el ’s veh ic le ; tha t, af

te r hi s v eh ic le ha d re tre at edbe hi ndHou se ’s veh ic le , W ib el ha d app ro ach edHou se ’s veh ic le fro m th e rear so qu ic kl y

th atHou se ha d

“ ex pe ct edim

pa ct ”; an d t ha t Wib el ha d p as se d Ho us e inth e ri gh t l an e an d t he n c ut ba ckinfro ntof Ho us e in th e le ft l an e, na rro wly m is si ng th e b um pe r of Hou se ’s ve hi cl e. The p ro se cu to r ga ve W ib el a co py of th e rep ort t o re fere nc e whi le th e pr os ecu to r qu es ti on edhi m . W ib el tes ti fie d t ha t Ho us e’s rep ort was fal se . W ib el tes ti fie d t ha t h e h adno t acce le rat edto pre ve ntHou se fro m pa ss in g h im ; tha t h e h adno t driv enou t o f si gh t of Hou se ’s veh ic le , th atth e o nl y reas on he ha d “ c[o ]m e up o n t he rearof [Ho us e’s] veh ic le ” was be cau se Hou se ha d h itth e b rak es , andth athe ha d n otcu t in fro ntof Ho us e’s ve hi cl e so th athe na rro wly m is se d t he bu m pe r of th e v eh ic le . 20W ib el als o t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e h adno t d is cl os edin hi s re po rt t ha t Wib el ha d

ch an ge d l an es to all ow Ho us e to pa ss hi m , th atHou se ha d t ai lg at edW ib el , or tha t Hou se ha d s la m

m edhi s b rak es aft er Wibe l h adm erg edin to th e le ft l an e b eh in d Hou se . Dan ie l M cFar la nd , a po li ce o ffi cer wi th th e Ci ty of Atl an taPo li ce Dep artm en t, t es ti fie d t ha t h e was dri vi ng fas te r th anth e sp eedli m iton Int ers ta te 75 aro un d 6 :1 5 a .m . on Jan ua ry 9, 2 00 9, wh enhe no ti cedHou se dri vi ng a la w en fo rcem en t v eh ic le in th e ad jacen t l an e. McFa rla ndwas i n h is pe rs on al ve hi cl e an d was no t i n u ni fo rm . McFar la ndde crea se d h is sp eedwhen he saw Ho us e’s ve hi cl e so th atth e two ve hi cl es were trav el in g t he same spe ed , with M cFar la nd ’s ve hi cl e ro ug hl y

a car l en gt h b eh in d Ho us e’s ve hi cl e. Hou se th ensl owe d u nt il hi s ve hi cl e was pa ral le l wi th McFa rla nd ’s veh ic le , th ensl owe d a ga in an d m erg ed be hi ndMcFa rla nd , th enm erg edin to th e lane to th e ri gh t o f McF arl an d a nd acce le rat edun ti l h is ve hi cl e was pa ral le l wi th McFa rland ’s veh ic le , th en acce le rat edag ai n andm erg edinfro ntof M cFar la nd . Hou se th ende crea se d h is sp eedto 35 or 4 0 m il es anho ur , eve n t ho ug h the sp eedli m itwas 5 0 m il es pe r ho ur an d t he re was no tra ffi c o n the Int ers ta te at t he ti m e. McFa rla nddro ve be hi nd Hou se forrou gh ly a mil e an d t he n c ha ng edlan es , acce le rat edup to th e sp eed li m it , andpa ss edHou se . 21Hou se th enact iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts , andMcFa rla ndbe li ev edhe was le ga ll y ob li ga te d t o p ul l o ve r. McFa rla ndbe ga n t o p ul l o ve r to th e ri gh t, an d Hou se fol lo wedhi m . As McF arl an d was sl owi ng hi s v eh ic le to a st op on th e ri gh t sh ou ld er o f th e ro ad , Hou se tu rn edoff hi s emergen cy

li gh ts an d c on ti nu eddri vi ng . McF arl an d p ul le d b ackon to th e in te rs ta te be hi ndHou se . Whe n M cFar la ndcau gh t up to Hou se , Hou se sl am m edhi s b rak es forno ap paren t re as on , for ci ng McF arl an d t o s la m

hi s o wn b rak es to av oi d ru nn in g i nt o Ho us e’s ve hi cl e. McF arl an d t he n a ccel erat edun ti l h e was pa ral le l wi thHou se an d m ot io ne d fo r Hou se to pu ll ov er; McFa rla ndwant edto askHou se ab ou t the reas on s fo r Hou se ’s act io ns . Bot h d riv ers pu ll edoff of t he in te rs ta te , andMcFa rla ndgo t o utof h is ve hi cl e to sp eakwith Ho us e. Hou se y el le d a t M cFar la nd , tel li ng hi m to return t o hi s v eh ic le , andMcFa rla ndreturne d t o h is ve hi cl e an d d ro ve away . Dur in g t he pro se cu to r’s di rectex am in at io n o f McF arl an d, h e subm it te d i nt o ev id en ce the in ci de ntrep ort Ho us e h adfil edreg ard in g Ho us e’s en co un te r wit h McF arl an d. Ho us e st at edin th e rep ort tha t M cFar la ndha d i ni ti al ly app ro ach ed Hou se in Hou se ’s lan e an d h adco m e v ery cl os e to th e rea r of Hou se ’s veh ic le ; tha t Hou se ha d c ha ng edlan es to av oi d M cFar la nd ; tha t M cFar la ndha d wo ve n i n a nd ou t o f tr affi c; th atMcFarla ndha d n earl y si de swi pe d Ho us e’s ve hi cl e; an d tha t McF arl an d h adap pr oa ch edHou se ’s veh ic le with h is ha nd s i n h is po ck et s s ho ut in g 22“ I am

a po li ce o ffi cer” whenth e two dri ve rs ha d p ul le d o ff o f th e in te rs ta te . Hou se di d n otall eg e th atMcFa rla ndha d b een sp eed in g. Th e p ro se cu to r ga ve McF arl an d aco py of th e rep ort t o re fere nc e whi le th e p ro se cu to r qu es ti on edhi m . McF arl an d t es ti fie d tha t Ho us e’s rep ort was fal se . McFar la ndtes ti fie d t ha t he an d Ho us e were d riv in g i n d iff eren t l an es when he ha d i ni ti al ly app ro ach ed Hou se ’s veh ic le , th athe ha d n otco m e cl os e to strik in g Ho us e’s ve hi cl e fro m th e ot he r la ne as h e ap pr oa ch edth e v eh ic le , th atHou se ha d n otha d t o c ha ng e la ne s t o av oi d h im , th athe ha d n otwov eninan d o utof traff ic , th athe ha d n otne arl y si de swi pe d Ho us e’s ve hi cl e, an d t ha t h e h adno t ap pr oa ch edHou se ’s veh ic le with hi s h an ds in hi s p oc ke ts sh ou ti ng “ I am a po li ce o ffi cer” aft er the y ha d p ul le d o ff of th e in te rs ta te . McFar la ndals o t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e h adno t d is cl os edin hi s rep ort tha t Ho us e h adact iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts , th atHou se ha d a tt em pt edto co nduc t a t raff

ic st op of M cFar la nd , or tha t Ho us e sl amm edhi s b rak es in fro ntof McF arl an d. Reg in al d Th om

ps on tes ti fie d t ha t, o n Ap ril 15 , 20 09 , he turne d ri gh t fr om a bu si ne ss pa rk in g l oton to a fo ur -la ne roa d a fte r ch eck in g t o m ak e su re tha t the re was no on co m in g t raff

ic an d tha t h e co ul d p ul l o utsaf el y . He in it ia ll y

tu rn edin to anacce le rat io n l an e, whe re h e “ go t up t o s pe ed ,” an d t he n m erg edin to th e ri gh t la ne , tra ve li ng at asp eedof 4 1 o r 42 m il es pe r ho urin a 45 -m il e-p er-h ou r zo ne . 23Afte r ch eck in g h is m irr or s an d n ot in g t ha t the tra ffi c in th e le ft l an e was “ a g oo d

di st an ce b ack ,” he m erg edin to th e le ft l an e, atwhi ch po in t Ho us e b eg an ap pr oa ch in g qui ck ly from Tho m ps on ’s rear i n alaw en fo rcem en t v eh ic le . Hou se ho nk edhi s h orn a t Th om ps on an d p as se d Th om

ps on on th e ri gh t, trav el in g fa st er th anth e sp eedli m it . A sho rt wh il e la te r, Tho m ps on st op pe d b eh in d Ho us e ata red li gh t. Whenth e li gh t turne d g reen , Hou se co nt in ue d d riv in g wi th Tho m ps on be hi ndhi m

th ro ug h s ev eral in te rs ect io ns un ti l the y reac he d a n a rea wh ere t he tra ffi c th in ne d, an d t he n Ho us e ab rupt ly redu cedhi s s pe ed , for ci ng Tho m ps on to pu ll ov er o n t he si de of t he roa d. Ho us e th enpa rk edhi s v eh ic le in fro ntof Tho m ps on ’s veh ic le at a n a ng le , bl oc ki ng hi m in . Tho m

ps on di d n otbe li ev e h e was free to lea ve be cau se he co ul d s ee fro m Hou se ’s un ifo rm

th atHou se was a po li ce o ffi cer, Ho us e’s ve hi cl e was pa rk edso as t o p rev en t Th om ps on fro m dr iv in g h is ve hi cl e b ackon to th e ro ad , andHou se ha d agu n. Hou se ap pr oa ch edTho m ps on ’s veh ic le , app eare d “ ve ry an gry ,” an d t ol d Tho m ps on th athe ha d s umm on edlo cal law en fo rcem en t. Des pi te Tho m ps on ’s rep eat edin qu iri es , Hou se refu se d t o t el l Th om ps on hi s n am e, th e n am e o f th e ag en cy th atem pl oyed h im , or wh y

he ha d s to pp edTho m

ps on . Hou se di rect ed Tho m ps on to fol lo w hi m

to a ne arb y

cem et ery dr iv eway whe re the re was les s tra ffi c, an d b oth m enm ov edth ei r ve hi cl es . Tho m ps on be li ev edhe ha d n o c ho ic e 24bu t t o fo ll ow Ho us e b ecau se Hou se was apo li ce o ffi cer i n apo li ce v eh ic le . After

th ey ha d b een wait in g i n t he cem et ery dr iv eway fo r se ve n o r ei gh t m in ut es , Hou se di rect edTho m

ps on to fol lo w Hou se to a res taur an t p ark in g l otto m ak e way fora fu ne ral pro ces si on , andTho m ps on co m pl ie d. Lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers arri ve d a t the pa rk in g l otat t he same tim e as Hou se an d Th om ps on , andth ey qu es ti on edHou se an d Th om ps on . Duri ng th e que st io ni ng , Hou se accu se d Tho m ps on of f ai li ng to y ie ldth e ri gh t o f way , andTho m ps onrep li ed , “ y ou ’re rig ht .” Tho m

ps on “ ha d n otdo ne an yth in g wro ng ” an d o nl y to ldHou se th athe was rig htbe cau se Tho m

ps on fel t tha t h e “ co ul dn ’t win ” wit h Ho us e, an d h e wan te d t o “pa ci fy

th e si tu at io n” an d “ ap pe as e” Ho us e. Dur in g t he pro se cu to r’s di rectex am in at io n o f Tho m ps on , th e p ro se cu to r sh owe d Th om

ps on a co py of th e in ci de ntrep ort Ho us e h adfil edreg ard in g Hou se ’s enc ou nt er wi th Tho m ps on , whi ch th e p ro se cu to r ha d a lre ady subm it te d in to ev id en ce. Hou se st at edin th e rep ort tha t Th om ps on ha d c utacro ss th ree l an es of tra ffi c as he pu ll edou t o f a b us in es s p ark in g l oton to th e ro adway an d h ad en te redHou se ’s lan e, ne arl y strik in g Ho us e’s ve hi cl e; th athe ha d p as se d Tho m ps on ’s veh ic le on th e ri gh t an d c on ti nu eddri vi ng ; tha t h e h adlat er p ul le d in to a “bu si ne ss dri ve way ” to cal l 9 11 ; an d t ha t Th om ps on ha d s to pp edof h is own vo li ti on whi le Hou se was o n t he ph on e wit h t he 91 1 o pe rat or . 25Tho m ps ontes ti fie d t ha t thi s re po rt wa s fa ls e. Tho m ps on als o t es ti fie d t ha t Hou se fai le d t o d is cl os e in hi s re po rt t ha t Ho us e h adfor cedTho m ps on to pu ll ov er, tha t Ho us e h addi rect edTho m ps on to fol lo w hi m

in to th e cem et ery dr iv eway, or t ha t Ho us e h addi rect edTho m ps on to fol lo w hi m

fro m th e cem et ery dr iv eway to th e res taur an t p ark in g l ot . Whe n t he go ve rn m en t re st edit s ca se , Hou se m ov edfora jud gm en t o f acqui tt al on all co un ts . The d is tri ctco urt d en ie d the m ot io n. Ho us e th encal le d th ree wi tn es se s. Jo hn Beal , th e Geo rg ialaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer wh o h adarre st edW ib el on Decem be r 3, 2 00 8, t es ti fie d tha t h e h adno t p ers on al ly w itne ss edW ib el dri vi ng ag gr es si ve ly andth athi s o nl y au th or it y to st op W ib el ha d b een ba se d o n arad io di sp at ch rep ort i ni ti at edby H ou se , adv is in g a ll off ic ers to be on th e lo ok ou t fo r a po ss ib le ag gr es si ve dri ve r ina ve hi cl e m at ch in g t he de sc rip ti on of Wib el ’s ve hi cl e. Beal ex pl ai ne d t ha t h e h adtre at edHou se ’s rep ort as pro babl e cau se to st op W ib el be cau se Hou se was alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, an d re po rts by law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers are t reat eddi ffer en tl y th anrep orts by priv at e ci ti zen s. Be al al so tes ti fie d t ha t h e b el ie ve d Ho us e’s acc ou ntof the en co un te r be twee n Ho us e an d Wib el be cau se Hou se was alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, an d “ ge ne ral ly a po li ce of fic er i s s up po se d t o b e h el d t o ahi gh er s tand ardan d g iv e y outh e trut h.” Beal 26st at edth athe ha d a rres te d Wib el ba se d o n Ho us e’s acc ou ntof e ve nt s, Ho us e’s

su gg es ti on th athe was c ert ifi edas ape ace o ffi cer i n Geo rg ia , andHou se ’s in si st en ce tha t Be al arre stW ib el . Hou se att em

pt edto in tro du ce t es ti m on y fro m two ot he r wit ne ss es . The fi rs t was a Geo rg ialaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer wh o was pre pa redto tes ti fy reg ard in g a tra ffi c st op Hou se ha d c on du ct edbu t fo r whi chHou se was n otin di ct ed . The se co ndwas alawyer li cen se d t o p ract ic e in Geor gi a who was p rep aredto tes ti fy as to Geor gi a la w reg ard in g t raff ic st op s an d arres ts . Butth e d is tri ctco urt d idno t pe rm iteit he r wit ne ss to tes ti fy . Whe n Ho us e res te d h is cas e, th e d is tri ctco urt s ta te d t ha t al l the ev id en ce was clo se d. Ho us e d idno t re ne w hi s m ot io n fo r a jud gm en t o f acqui tt al . Bot h t he pr os ecu to r an d Ho us e th ende li ve redth ei r cl os in g arg um en ts to th e jury. Dur in g t he pro se cu to r’s cl os in g a rg um en t, h e rem ark edin refe ren ce t o Hou se ’s enc ou nt ers with P ad ge tt , “ W e d on ’t hav e th e d efen da nt ’s ver si on of tha t st op be cau se th ere i s n o re po rt abo utth aton e. The o nl y ev id en ce you h av e th eref or e is th atI wasn ’t do in g a nyth in g wro ng bu t driv in g d ownth e ro adin th e le ft- ha ndlan e an d I g otst op pe d fo r ag gr es si ve dri vi ng bo thti m es .” Hou se rai se d no ob jecti on to th es e st at em en ts .

27Hou se pro po se d s ev eral jury in st ru ct io ns . Am on g t he se were anin st ru ct io n

th atanoff

ic er’s s ub jecti ve m ot iv at io n fo r co nduc ti ng a tr affi c st op is irr el ev an t i n de te rm in in g t he reas on ab le ne ss of t he st op un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t, an in st ru ct io n t ha t a traff

ic st op is reas on ab le if b as edon pro babl e cau se , an in st ru ct io n t ha t fe de ral law p erm it s a l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer t o m ak e warra nt le ss arre st s fo r m in or

cri m in al off

en se s co m

m it te d i n t he off

ic er’s p res en ce, an in st ru ct io n t ha t the reas on ab le ne ss of alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer’s ac ti on s u nd er the Fo urthAm en dm en t d oe s n otde pe ndon th e o ffi cer’s co m pl ianc e wit h l oc al law o r po li cy , an i ns tru ct io n t ha t Geo rg ialaw p erm it s a p riv at e ci ti zento arre sta m ot or is t fo r a m in ortra ffi c v io la ti on , an i ns tru ct io n t ha t Geo rg ialaw p erm it s a l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer t o a rres t a m ot or is t fo r a traff ic off en se m ad e inth e o ffi cer’s pr es en ce, an in st ru ct io n t ha t Geo rg ialaw d efi ne s p eace off ic er as “ any

pe rs on who by virtu e o f hi s o ffi ce o r publ ic em pl oym en t i s v es te d b y

law wi tha du ty to m ai nt ai n p ub li c o rd er o r to m ak e arr es ts foroff en se s, wh ethe r th atdu ty ext en ds to al l cr im es or i s l im it edto sp eci fic off en se s,” a ndanin st ru ct io n t ha t n o o ne m ay be he ldcri m in al ly resp on si bl e fo r anactun le ss th e la w gi ve s fa ir wa rn in g t ha t the act is pro sc rib ed . The d is tri ctco urt re jecte d the se pro po se d i ns tru ct io ns .

28Init s ch arg e to th e jury, the di st ric t co urt ex pl ai ne d t ha t the jury m us t b as e it s v erd ic t o n a dm is si bl e ev id en ce an d t ha t s ta te m en ts by the lawyers an d t he co urt du rin g t he tri al were n otadm is si bl e ev id en ce:

Youm ak e y ou r de ci si on in th is cas e b as edup on th e te st im on y an d o th er ev id en ce p res en te d h ere dur in g tria l. Yo u re cal l I t ol d you whe n t hi s ca se st art edth atwhat ev er d eci si on y oum ad e h adto be ba se d upo n t he ev id en ce p res en te d i n t hi s co urtro om an d n ot hi ng el se .

. . . . As I s ta te d t o youearl ie r[,] y ouare t o c on si de r th e ev id en ce th atha s b eenadm it te d i n t hi s ca se . The t erm “ ev id en ce” i nc lu de s t he te st im on y of t he witne ss es , th e ex hi bi ts adm it te d i nt o the reco rd , and an y st ip ul at io n o f fac t m ad e b y co un se l. What ev er the lawyers s ay is no t ev id en ce i n t he cas e. Anditis y ou r own reco ll ect io n a nd in te rp ret at io n o f th e ev id en ce tha t co nt ro ls . Wha t the lawyers s ay is no t b in di ng on y ou . Also , y oush ou ldno t as su m e fro m an yth in g I m ay ha ve sai d dur in g t hi s t ria l [t ha t] I hav e an y op in io n c on cern in g an y of t he is su es in th is cas e. Exce ptform y in st ru ct io ns to y ouon th e la w, y oudi sr eg ardan yth in g I m ig htha ve sai d dur in g t he tri al in arri vi ng at you r de ci si onco nc ern in g t he fact s o f th is cas e. W it h re ga rdto th e requi rem en ts of t he Fo urth Am en dm en t as to tra ffi c st op s, the di st ric t co urt i ns tru ct edth e jury tha t a traff ic st op co nduc te d b y

a la w en fo rcem en t o ffi cer i s co ns ti tu ti on al on ly if th e o ffi cer h as bo thau th or it y or juri sd ic ti on an d asu ffi ci en t l eg al ba si s fo r th e st op . Thatis , th e d is tri ctco urt in st ru ct edth e jury tha t a traff ic st op co nduc te d b y

a law enf or cem en t o ffi cer i s

29un reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t wh en ev er the off ic er l ack s au th or it y

or juri sd ic ti on to co nduc t the st op :

As t o [s ic ] tra ffi c st op it se lf, u nd er the Fo urth Am en dm en t a la w enf or cem en t o ffi cer m

us t h av e au th or it y

or ju ris di ct io n a nd su ffi ci en t l eg al ba si s t o m ak e a traff ic st op . Both fa ct s m

us t b e p res en t in ord er fo r th e tr affi c st op to be lawf ul , andth eref

or e, no t a v io la ti on of th e d efen da nt ’s con st itut io na l ri gh ts . If y oufin d fr om

th e ev id en ce i n t hi s ca se th atth e d efen da ntdi d no t h av e au th or ity

or ju ris di ct io n a s a f

ed eral po li ce o ffi cer t o m ak e a tra ffi c st op in Geor gi a, th eny oum ay fin d a ndy ouwou ldbe au th or iz edto fin d t he act io ns in do in g s o wer e unr eas on ab le . Hou se ob jecte d t o t hi s i ns tru ct io n. The di stric t co urt i ns tru ct edth e jury tha t the leg al ba si s re qu ire d fo r a traff ic st op un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t was “ a rea so nabl e an d a rti cu labl e su sp ic io n” th atth e m ot or is t h adco m m it te d atra ffi c v io la ti on . The d is tri ctco urt d es cri be d “ a reas on ab le an d a rti cu labl e su sp ic io n” as “ le ss th anpro babl e cau se ,” bu t “ m or e th anjus t a h un ch be cau se th e Fo urth Am en dm en t re qu ire s ata m in im um so m e ob jecti ve jus ti fic at io n fo r th e tr affi c st op .” The d is tri ctco urt al so in stru ct edth e jury, “ Inde te rm in in g wh ethe r th ere was pro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n, y oum us t re ly onl y

on th e fac ts kn own to th e d efen da ntbe fo re the st op was m ad e.” The n t he di st ric t co urt ex pl ai ne d t ha t, i f th ey fou nda tr affi c st op was

“ la wfu l” in it ia ll y , th e jury m us t al so de te rm in e whe th er the de te nt io n fo ll owi ng th e st op was “ reas on ab le an d t he refo re l awfu l” : 30. . . [A] va li d t raff ic st op canin so m e ci rcu m st an ces tu rnin to an un reas on ab le an d t he refo re u nl awfu l d et en ti on of t he m ot or is ts . There is no bri gh t l in e te stto de te rm in e whe th er a l awfu l traff ic st op ha s be co m e u nl awfu l d et en ti on . A po li ce o ffi cer m ay de ta in a m ot or is t fo r a rea so nabl e p eri odforth e p ol ic e o ffi cer t o c on du ctth e n eces sa ry in ve st ig at io n t o d et erm in e wha t ac ti on he wil l t ak e. Inge ne ral , a po li ce o ffi cer m ay

de ta in a m ot or is t l on g e no ug h t o a ll ow t he off ic er to writ e a traff

ic ti ck etan d c he ckin to th e m ot or is t’s b ack gr ou ndto se e if th ere a re an y

warran ts an d s o fo rth ou ts ta nd in g. Inde te rm in in g whe th er a t raff

ic st op ha s b eco m e so in tru si ve th atth e d et en ti on is no lo ng er re as on ab le , y oum ay co ns id er fa ct or s s uc h a s t he publ ic in te res t s erv edby the sei zu re, the na tu re an d s co pe of t he in tru si on , [an d] th e o bjec ti ve fact s re li edup on by the off ic er i n m ak in g t he st op an d d et ai ni ng th e m ot or is t. Hou se ob jecte d t o t hi s i ns tru ct io n o n t he gro un d t ha t the “ba la nc in g t es t” th e di st ric t co urt d es cri be d i s n o l on ge r go odlaw as ap pl ie d t o traff ic st op s i ni ti al ly supp orte d b y

pro babl e cau se . The di stric t co urt i ns tru ct edth e jury tha t a d efen da ntm us t ac t “ wil lfu ll y ” in effe ct in g ade pr iv at io n o f ci vi l ri gh ts forth atde pr iv at io n t o c on st itut e a v io la ti on of sec ti on 24 2, b utth ata de pr iv at io n m ay be “ wil lfu l” ev enif t he de fen da ntwas no t thi nk in g i n l eg al or c on st itut io na l t erm s: . . . [A] n a ctis do ne wil lfu ll y if i t i s d on e v ol un ta ril y

an d d el ib erat el y an d wi th th e sp eci fic in te ntto do so m ethi ng th e la w for bi ds . Thatis wit h b adpu rp os e to di so be y or d is reg ardth e la w. Alth ou gh th e go ve rn m en t m

us t p ro ve be y on d areas on ab le do ub t tha t the def en da nt vo lu nt ari ly andde li be rat el y di d a n a ctth atde pr iv eda m ot or is t o f a pr ot ect edrig ht , itis no t n eces sa ry forth e g ov ern m en t t o p ro ve th e de fen da ntwas t hi nk in g i n l eg al or c on st itut io na l t erm s. Yo u [m] ay fin d t he de fen da ntact edwith t he requi redin te nt , eve n i f y oufin d h e ha d n o re al fam il ia rity

with t he co ns ti tu ti on or wi th th e p art ic ul ar

31co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s i nv ol ve d. Yo u m us t, h owe ve r, fin d t he de fen da nt in te nd edto do so m ethi ng th atth e co ns ti tu ti on forbi ds .

. . . . If y oufin d t he de fen da ntkn ew wha t h e was do in g a ndth athe in te nd edto do su ch anact , andif you f in d wh athe di d c on st itut eda de pr iv at io n o f a co ns ti tu ti on al rig htan d youso fin d b ey on d a reas on ab le do ub t, the n youm ay co nc lu de th athe act edwil lfu ll y . Hou se di d n otob

ject t o t hi s i ns tru ct io n. W it h re ga rdto th e v io la ti on s o f se ct io n 1 00 1 fo r m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts wit h wh ic h Ho us e was ch arg ed , th e d is tri ctco urt i ns tru ct edth e jury tha t “ th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce i s a d ep art m en t o r ag en cy of t he Uni te d S ta te s, an d t he fil in g o f rep orts or d oc um en ts with t he ag en cy is a m atte r wit hi n t he juri sd ic ti on of th e ag en cy .” Hou se di d n otob ject t o thi s i ns tru ct io n. Whe n t he jury le ft t he co urtro om fol lo win g t he jury ch arg e, th e p ro se cu to r in fo rm edth e d is tri ctco urt tha t i t h adfai le d t o i ns tru ctth e jury tha t the y were n ot pe rm it te d t o d raw an adve rs e in fere nc e fro m Hou se ’s fai lu re t o t es ti fy in hi s o wn de fen se . The d is tri ctco urt o ffer edto cal l the jury ba ckin to th e co urtro om an d pr ov id e th is in st ru ct io n t o t he m , bu t Ho us e d ecl in edth e o fferan d s ta te d, “ W e are fin e as itis . W e d on ’t askth aty oubri ng th em ba ck .” The jury fo un d Ho us e g ui lt y of a ll twel ve co un ts . The d is tri ctco urt se nt en cedHou se to eig ht een m on th s o f im pr is on m en t fo r eac h c ou nt , to be serve d 32co nc urren tl y , fol lo wedby thre e y ears of s up erv is edrel eas e fo r eac h c ou nt , to be

se rv edco nc urren tl y . The d is tri ctco urt al so ord eredHou se to pa y a fi ne of $1 0,0 00 . Hou se was re le as edon bo ndpe nd in g app eal .

II . STANDARDS OF REVIEW Sev eral st an da rd s g ov ernou r rev ie w of t hi s ap pe al . “ W e rev ie w cha ll en ge s to th e su ffi ci en cy

of t he ev id en ce d e n ov o,” an d a sk“ whe th er a re as on ab le jury co ul d h av e fo un d the de fen da ntgu il ty bey on d areas on ab le do ub t.” Un it edSta te s v. M erce r, 54 1 F .3d10 70 , 10 74 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ). Bu t wh ere ade fen da nt

“pr es en t[s ] hi s ca se aft er d en ia l o f a m ot io n fo r jud gm en t o f acqui tt al ” an d t he n

“ fai ls to ren ew hi s m ot io n fo r jud gm en t o f acqui tt al at the en d o f al l o f th e ev id en ce,” we re vi ew th e d efen da nt ’s cha ll en ge to th e su ffi ci en cy of t he ev id en ce fo r a m an ife stm is carr ia ge of ju st ic e. Uni te d S ta te s v . Jo ne s, 3 2 F .3d15 12 , 15 16 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 4) . This st an dardrequi res us to affi rm th e d efen dant ’s con vi ct io n un le ss “ th e ev id en ce o n ake y ele m en t o f th e o ffen se is so tenuo us th at[th e] co nv ic ti on [is ] sh oc ki ng .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Mil ki nt as , 47 0 F .3d13 39 , 13 43 (11 th Ci r. 20 06 ). “ Inm ak in g thi s d et erm in at io n, we m us t v ie w th e ev id en ce i n t he li gh t m os t fa vo rab le to th e g ov ern m en t an d a ccep t al l re as on ab le in fere nc es an d cred ib il it y

de te rm in at io ns th atsupp ort the jury’ s v erd ic t.” Id .

33W e rev ie w jury in st ru ct io ns ch al le ng edin th e d is tri ctco urt “ de no vo to de te rm in e whe th er the in st ru ct io ns m is st at edth e la w or m is le d the jury to th e pr ejud ic e o f th e o bjec ti ng pa rty.” Unit edSta te s v . Fel ts , 57 9 F .3d13 41 , 13 42 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 9) . In co nt ras t, jury in st ru ct io ns th atare ch al le ng edforth e fi rs t t im e on ap pe al are re vi ewedforpl ai n e rro r.” Id . at 1 34 3. We revi ew th e fai lu re t o g iv e a reque st edjury in st ru ct io n fo r ab us e o f di sc ret io n, wh ic h o ccu rs on ly whe re the reque st edin st ru ct io n “ (1 ) was co rrec t, (2 ) was no t s ub st an ti al ly cov eredby a ch arg e actua ll y

gi ve n, an d (3 ) de al t wi thso m e p oi ntin th e tr ia l s o i m po rta ntth at fai lu re t o g iv e th e reque st edin st ru ct io n s eri ou sl y im pa ire d t he de fen da nt ’s abi li ty to co nduc t h is de fen se .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Doh an , 50 8 F .3d98 9, 9 93 (11 thCir . 20 07 ). Whe re a p arty

ex pr es sl y

acce pt s a ju ry

in st ru ct io n, “ su ch act io n c on st itut es in vi te d e rro r” an d “ se rv e[s ] to waiv e [h is ] rig htto ch al le ng e th e acc ep te d in st ru ct io n o n app eal .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Sil ve st ri, 4 09 F.3d13 11 , 13 37 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). W e wil l n otrev ers e a d efen da nt ’s con vi ct io n b as edon a ch al le ng e to th e jury charg e u nl es s we are “ le ft wi th a subs ta nt ia l an d i ne rad ic ab le do ub t as to whe th er the jury was pro pe rly gu id edinit s d el ib erat io ns .” Fel ts , 57 9 F .3dat 13 43 ; Do ha n, 5 08 F.3dat 9 93 . “ Ju ry in st ru ct io ns are s ub

ject t o h arm le ss erro r rev ie w.” Uni te d S ta te s v . W eb b, 6 55 F.3d12 38 , 12 49 n.8 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ). An erro r is ha rm le ss if t he rev ie win g c ou rt i s s at is fie d “ be y on d areas on ab le do ub t tha t 34th e err orco m pl ai ne d o f di d n otco ntrib ut e to th e v erd ic t o bt ai ne d.” Chapm anv. Cal ifo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 1 8, 2 4, 8 7 S . Ct. 8 24 , 82 8 (1 96 7) .

“ W e rev ie w a di st ric t ju dg e’s co nduc t dur in g t ria l fo r ab us e o f di sc ret io n.” Uni te d S ta te s v . Verb it sk ay a, 40 6 F .3d13 24 , 13 37 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). But wh ere a de fen da nt“ rai se s [an] is su e fo r th e fi rs t t im e o n app eal , we rev ie w iton ly for p la in erro r.” Uni te d S ta te s v . McNai r, 60 5 F .3d11 52 , 12 22 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ). “ W e m ay no t co rrec t an erro r th e ap pe ll an t fa il edto rai se in th e d is tri ctco urt u nl es s t he re i s: (1 ) erro r, (2 ) th atis pl ai n, an d (3 ) th ataffec ts subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts .” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . “ If the pre ced in g t hr ee co nd it io ns are m et , we m ay ex erci se di sc ret io n t o c orrecta fo rfei te d e rro r, bu t o nl y if (4 ) th e err orser io us ly affe ct s t he fai rn es s, i nt eg rit y , or p ub li c rep ut at io n o f jud ic ia l p ro ceed in gs .” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . W e al so ap pl y th e p la inerro r st an da rdwhen we rev ie w th e fai lu re t o g iv e a cu rat iv e in stru ct io n s uasp on te . Uni te d S ta te s v . Thi gp en , 4 F.3 d 1 57 3, 1 57 9 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 3) .

“ W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s ev id en ti ary ru li ng s fo r cl ear abu se of di sc ret io n.” Uni te d S ta te s v . Perez -Oli ve ro s, 4 79 F.3d77 9, 7 83 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ).

“ An ab us e o f di sc ret io n o ccu rs if t he di st ric t co urt ap pl ie s an in co rrec t l eg al st an da rdor m ak es fin di ng s o f fac t tha t ar e cl earl y erro ne ou s.” Un it edSta te s v . W il k, 5 72 F.3d12 29 , 12 34 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ). “ Eve n wh ere a n abu se of d is cret io n 35is sh own , no nc on st itut io na l ev id en ti ary erro rs are n otgro un ds forrev ers al ab se nta

reas on ab le li ke li ho odth atth e d efen da nt ’s subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts were af fect ed .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Sel le rs , 90 6 F .2d59 7, 6 01 (11 th Cir . 19 90 ). Thatis , we wil l n ot rev ers e a d efen da nt ’s con vi ct io n o n t he ba si s o f anev id en ti ary erro r th atdo es no t im pl ic at e h is co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s “ if t he erro r ha d n o s ub st an ti al in flu en ce, an d en ou gh ev id en ce s up po rts th e res ul t ap artfro m th e p ha se affe ct edby error .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Sto ut , 66 7 F .2d13 47 , 13 52 (11 th Cir . 19 82 ). W e rev ie w cla im s o f pr os ecu to ria l m is co nduc t d e n ov o. Un it edSta te s v . Eckhard t, 4 66 F.3d93 8, 9 47 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). But wh ere ade fen da ntfai ls to m ak e a co nt em

po ran eo us ob

jecti on to th e al le ge d m is co nduc t i n t he di stric t co urt, we rev ie w su ch cla im s fo r pl ai n e rro r. Uni te d S ta te s v . Newto n, 4 4 F .3d91 3, 9 20 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 5) . Whe n we a dd res s a c la im of c um ul at iv e err or , we con si de r “ al l erro rs pr es erv edforap pe al an d a ll pl ai n e rro rs ” in th e co nt ex t o f “ th e tr ia l as a who le to de te rm in e whe th er the ap pe ll an t was affo rd eda fu nd am en ta ll y fai r tr ia l.” Un it ed St at es v. Lad so n, 6 43 F.3d13 35 , 13 42 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ). “ The to ta l ef fectof the erro rs on th e tr ia l wi ll de pe nd , am on g o th er thi ng s, o n t he na tu re an d n um be r of th e err or s co m

m it te d; th ei r in te rrel at io ns hi p, i f an y , andco m bi ne d e ffec t; . . . th e st ren gth o f th e g ov ern m en t’s ca se [;] an d t he len gt h o f tr ia l.” Un it edSta te s v . 36Bak er, 4 32 F.3d11 89 , 12 23 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s an d

al te rat io n o m it te d) . II I. DI SCUSSI ON Hou se rai se s s ev enarg um en ts on ap pe al . Firs t, h e arg ue s t ha t the reco rd do es no t co nt ai n s uf

fic ie ntev id en ce t o s up po rt h is co nv ic ti on s. Sec on d, h e arg ue s th atth e d is tri ctco urt erredin in st ru ct in g t he jury. Thi rd , he a rg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt i m pr op erl y in te rject edit se lf i nt o t he tri al . Fou rth , he a rg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt i m pr op erl y ex cl ud edev id en ce. Fi fth , he a rg ue s t ha t the pro se cu to r im pr op erl y co m m en te d o n Ho us e’s de ci si onno t t o t es ti fy . Six th , he a rg ue s i n h is rep ly brie f th athi s co un se l was in effe ct iv e. Sev en th , he a rg ue s t ha t the cu m ul at iv e effe ctof t he erro rs de pr iv edhi m of afai r tr ia l. We addres s ea charg um en t i n turn. A. Su ff ic ie nt Eviden ce S

up po rt s Ho us e’s Co nv ic ti on s. Hou se arg ue s t ha t the go ve rn m en t p res en te d i ns uf fic ie ntev id en ce t o supp ort h is eig htco nv ic ti on s fo r wil lfu l u nr eas on ab le sei zures an d h is fou r co nv ic ti on s fo r m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts . W e co nc lu de th atth e ev id en ce, v ie wed in th e li gh t m os t favo rab le to th e g ov ern m en t, es tabl is he s t ha t n o m an ife st m is carr ia ge of ju st ic e o ccu rred . W e d is cu ss th is ev id en ce i n t wo p art s. Fi rs t, we ad dr es s t he ev id en ce tha t supp orts Hou se ’s con vi ct io ns forwil lfu l u nr eas on ab le sei zures . Seco nd , we 37ad dr es s t he ev id en ce tha t s up po rts Hou se ’s con vi ct io ns form ak in g fa ls e

st at em en ts . 1. Co nv ic ti on s fo r W il lfu l Un reas on ab le Sei zu res Hou se arg ue s t ha t the re was in su ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o s up po rt h is co nv ic ti on s fo r th e wil lfu l v io la ti on s o f th e Fo urth Am en dm en t ch arg edin co un ts on e, two , th ree, fo ur , si x, s ev en , ni ne , or e le ve n. He co nt en ds th athe ha d aut ho rit y to effe ct th e se iz ur es as a n a ge ntof t he go ve rn m en t an d t ha t the sei zures were re as on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t. Ho us e arg ue s t ha t h e h adpro babl e cau se forth e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts two , th ree, an d n in e b ecau se th e m ot or is ts id en ti fie d i n th os e co un ts adm it te d t ha t the y were s pe ed in g andth athe ha d p ro babl e cau se for th e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts on e, si x, s ev en , andele ve n b ecau se th e m ot or is ts id en ti fie d i n t ho se co un ts adm it te d t o d riv in g i n am an ne r th atco ul d b e co ns id ered un sa fe. Hou se als o m ai nt ai ns th atwe m us t re ve rs e h is co nv ic ti on s o n c ou nt s s ix , se ve n, n in e, an d e le ve n b ecau se he was n otres po ns ib le forth e se iz ur es id en ti fie d in th os e co un ts . Hou se co nt en ds alt ern at iv el y th at , if h e was no t p erm it te d t o effe ctth e ch arg edsei zu res as a n a ge ntof t he go ve rn m en t, the n h is act io ns co ul d no t h av e im

pl ic at edth e Fo urth Am en dm en t. Alt ho ug h we c on cl ud e th atsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce s up po rts all eig htof Ho us e’s co nv ic ti on s u nd er s ect io n 2 42 , we nee d n otdi sc us s Ho us e’s co nv ic ti on s o n c ou nt s 38on e, two , th ree, o r si x. We m us t v acat e th os e fo urco nv ic ti on s o n a no th er g ro un d, whi chwe ad dr es s i n S ect io n B . Hou se ’s con vi ct io ns do no t re pr es en t a m an ife st in jus ti ce. To p ro ve a vi ol at io n o f se ct io n 2 42 , th e g ov ern m en t h adto pre se ntev id en ce th atHou se act ed“ (1 ) wil lfu ll y an d (2 ) un de r co lo r of

law (3 ) to de pr iv e a p ers on of rig ht s p ro te ct edby the Co ns ti tu ti on or l aws of t he Uni te d S ta te s.” Un it edSta te s v. Lan ie r, 52 0 U.S. 2 59 , 26 4, 1 17 S. Ct. 1 21 9, 1 22 4 (1 99 7) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . The fed eral rig htth atHou se all eg ed ly vio la te d i s t he rig htun de r th e Fo urthAm en dm en t t o b e fre e fro m un reas on ab le sei zu res . See U.S. C O N S T ., am en d. IV. To e st ab li sha de pr iv at io n o f th atrig ht , th e g ov ern m en t m us t p ro ve th ata se iz ur e o ccu rred , th atth e se iz ur e was un reas on ab le , andth atth e se iz ur e co ns ti tu te d “ go ve rn m en ta l ac ti on ”—t ha t i s, tha t the in di vi du al who effe ct edth e se iz ur e was “ act in g a s an ag en t o f th e Gov ern m en t o r wit h t he pa rti ci pa ti on or kn owl ed ge of a ny go ve rn m en ta l o ffi ci al ,” se e Uni te d S ta te s v . Jac ob se n, 4 66 U.S. 10 9, 1 13 , 10 4 S . Ct. 1 65 2, 1 65 6 (1 98 4) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . Co nduc t “un de r co lo r of

law” sat is fie s t he requi rem en t o f go ve rn m en ta l ac ti on . Cf. Lug ar v . Edm on ds on Oil Co ., 45 7 U.S. 9 22 , 92 8– 29 & n .9, 1 02 S. Ct. 2 74 4, 27 49 & n .9 (1 98 2) .

39“ [A] pers on is ‘ se iz ed ’ . . . whe n, b y m ean s o f ph y si cal for ce o r a s ho w of au th or it y , hi s fr eed om

of m ov em en t i s re strai ne d” su ch th at , “ invi ew of all of t he ci rcu m st an ces surro un di ng th e in ci de nt , a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ldha ve be li ev ed th athe was n otfree to lea ve .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Men de nh al l, 4 46 U.S. 54 4, 55 3– 54 , 10 0 S . Ct. 1 87 0, 1 87 7 (1 98 0) . A sei zu re i s ef fect edby force “ whe n t he re is a go ve rn m en ta l t erm in at io n o f free do m of m ov em en t thr ou gh m ean s in te nt io na ll y

ap pl ie d[ ,] ” su ch as wh ere alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer p ul ls hi s v eh ic le

“ al on gs id e [a] flee in g c ar an d s id es wip e[s ] it , pro du ci ng [a] cras h” reg ard le ss of whe th er the off

ic er i nt en ds “ to gi ve th e o nc om in g d riv er the op ti on of avo lu nt ary st op ” o r “ to pro du ce a c ol li si on .” Bro wer v . Cou nt y of I nyo, 48 9 U.S. 5 93 , 59 7– 99 , 10 9 S . Ct. 1 37 8, 1 38 1– 82 (19 89 ). A sei zu re b y m ean s o f sh ow o f au th or it y requi res bo th a sh ow o f au th or it y an d s ub m is si on to th atau th or it y . Cal ifo rn iav. Ho da ri D., 4 99 U.S. 62 1, 6 28 –2 9, 1 11 S. Ct. 1 54 7, 1 55 1– 52 (19 91 ). Tha t i s, a g ov ern m en t o ffi cer e ffec ts a se iz ur e b y m ean s o f a s ho w of aut ho rit y whe re “ th e o ffi cer’s wo rd s an d a ct io ns wou ldha ve co nv ey ed. . . to a reas on ab le pe rs on ” th at“ he was b ei ng ord eredto res tri cthi s m ov em en t,” a ndth os e wor ds an d act io ns actua ll y

“pr oduc e h is st op .” Id . Cert ai n “ ci rcu m st an ces . . . m ig htin di cat e a se iz ur e, ev enwher e th e p ers ondi d n otatt em ptto lea ve ,” in cl ud in g “ th e d is pl ay of a weap on by an o ffi cer . . . orth e u se of l an gu ag e o r to ne of v oi ce i nd ic at in g 40th atco m

pl ia nc e wit h t he off

ic er’s reque stmig htbe co m pe ll ed .” Men de nh al l, 4 46 U.S. at 5 54 , 10 0 S . Ct. at18 77 . An arre stis th e “ qu in te ss en ti al ” ex am pl e o f a se iz ur e o f th e p ers on . Hod ari D., 49 9 U.S. at62 4, 1 11 S. Ct. at15 50 . In ad di ti on ,

“ [t]em po rary det en ti on of i nd iv idua ls du rin g t he st op of an aut om ob il e b y th e po li ce, ev enif o nl y

fora br ie f pe rio d a ndfora li m it edpu rp os e, co ns ti tu te s a ‘seiz ur e’ of ‘pers on s’ withi n t he m ean in g o f [the Fo urth Am en dm en t].” Whr en , 51 7 U.S. at80 9– 10 , 11 6 S . Ct. at17 72 . A tra ffi c st op co ns ti tu te s anun reas on ab le sei zu re i f itis no t s up po rte d b y reas on ab le su sp ic io n o r pr ob ab le cau se . Id. at81 0, 1 16 S. Ct. at17 72 ; Un it ed St at es v. Ch an th as ou xa t, 3 42 F.3d12 71 , 12 75 (11 th Cir . 20 03 ). But a t raff ic st op is reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urthAm en dm en t wh ensupp orte d b y pro babl e cau se or reas on ab le su sp ic io n e ve n i f itis in co ns is te ntwith a ge nc y po li cy , see Whr en , 51 7 U.S. at 8 13 –1 6, 1 16 S. Ct. at17 74 –7 6, o r st at e la w, see Mo or e, 55 3 U.S. at 17 3– 76 , 12 8 S . Ct. at16 05 –0 7. Pro babl e cau se requi res th at“ th e fac ts an d ci rcu m st an ces withi n [a n o ffi cer’s] kn owl ed ge an d o f whi ch [th e o ffi cer] ha [s ] reas on ab ly trus two rth y

in fo rm at io n [b e] suf

fic ie ntto warran t a p ru de ntm anin be li ev in g” th atth e p ers on sei zedis gu il ty of a cri m e. Beckv. Oh io , 37 9 U.S. 8 9, 91 , 85 S. Ct. 2 23 , 22 5 (1 96 4) . Reas on ab le su sp ic io n re qu ire s “ so m e m in im al lev el of ob jecti ve jus ti fic at io n,” m ean in g “ so m ethi ng m or e th ananin ch oa te an d 41unpa rti cu la riz edsu sp ic io n o r hu nc h,” th atth e p ers on sei zedis gu il ty of a cri m e.

Uni te d S ta te s v . Sok ol ow, 4 90 U.S. 1, 7 , 10 9 S . Ct. 1 58 1, 1 58 5 (1 98 9) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . If th e sc op e o f th e tr affi c st op ex ceed s t ha t o f “ an in ve st ig at iv e st op of l im it eddu rat io n,” itco ns ti tu te s an un reas on ab le sei zu re un le ss itis supp orte d b y

pro babl e cau se . Uni te d S ta te s v . Acos ta , 36 3 F .3d11 41 , 11 45 –4 6 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 4) . A per so n a ct s “ wil lfu ll y ” fo r pu rp os es of s ect io n 2 42 when he act s wi th “ a sp eci fic in te ntto de pr iv e a p ers on of afed eral rig htm ad e d efi ni te by deci si on or ot he r ru le of l aw,” o r “ in op ende fia nc e o r in reck le ss di sr eg ardof aco ns ti tu ti on al requi rem en t wh ic h h as be enm ad e sp eci fic an d d efi ni te .” Scre ws v . Uni te d S ta te s, 32 5 U.S. 9 1, 1 03 , 10 5, 6 5 S . Ct. 1 03 1, 1 03 6– 37 (19 45 ). Thi s C ou rt h as reco gn iz edth ata se rie s o f in di vi du al act io ns th at“ supp ort an in no cen t ex pl an at io n,” when “ vi ewedina va cuum ,” m ay in co m bi na ti on pro vi de su ffi ci en t ev id en ce fo r a rea so nabl e juro r to in fer a d efen da nt ’s in te nt . Uni te d S ta te s v . Harri s, 2 0 F .3d44 5, 4 53 (11 th Cir . 19 94 ). W e h av e al so ex pl ai ne d t ha t, i n m ak in g fin di ng s o f a d efen da nt ’s in te nt , th e d efen da nt ’s “ subs eque ntco nduc t m ay be co ns id eredif i t s up po rts a reas on ab le in fere nc e as to [hi s] pri or in te nt .” Uni te d St at es v. Mc Carr ic k, 2 94 F.3d12 86 , 12 91 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ).

42An ac t i s ef fect ed“un de r co lo r of

law” forpu rp os es of s ect io n 2 42 if i t i s effe ct edby a law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer a ct in g “ un de r pr et en se of l aw.” Scre ws, 3 25 U.S. at 1 11 , 65 S. Ct. at10 40 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . “ Acts of o ffi cers who un de rta ke to pe rfo rm th ei r of fic ia l dut ie s ar e in cl ud edwhethe r th ey he w to th e li ne of t he ir aut ho rit y or o ve rs te p i t.” Id .; s ee al so Uni te d S ta te s v . Cla ss ic , 31 3 U.S. 2 99 , 32 6, 6 1 S . Ct. 1 03 1, 1 04 3 (1 94 1) (“ Mi su se of p owe r, po ss es se d b y vi rtu e o f st at e la w andm ad e p os si bl e o nl y be cau se th e wro ng do er i s cl ot he d wi th th e au th or it y

of s ta te law, i s ac ti on tak en‘ un de r co lo r of’ st at e la w.”). Thu s, a l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer a ct s u nd er co lo r of law “ whe n h e act s wi th auth or it y po ss es se d b y

vi rtu e o f hi s emplo ym en t” with t he go ve rn m en t, Al m an d v . DeKalb Cn ty., 10 3 F .3d15 10 , 15 13 (11 th Cir . 19 97 ), or“ th e m an ne r of hi s co nduc t . . . m ak es cle ar tha t h e was ass ert in g t he au th or it y gra nt edhi m

an d n otact in g i n t he ro le of apri va te pe rs on .” W il li am s v . Uni te d S ta te s, 3 41 U.S. 97 , 10 0, 7 1 S . Ct. 57 6, 5 78 (19 51 ) (h ol di ng th ata jury cou ldfin d t ha t a p riv at e d et ect iv e who was qu al ifi edas asp eci al po li ce o ffi cer h adact edun de r co lo r of law wh enhe fla sh ed hi s b ad ge whi le co m

m it ti ng a se rie s o f as saul ts ). a. Evi de nc e o f th e Sei zures The go ve rn m en t o ffer edsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o e st ab li shth atHou se sei zed th e m ot or is ts du rin g t he en co un te rs id en ti fie d i n c ou nt s fo ur , sev en , ni ne , and 43el ev en . Every enco un te r in vo lv eda sh ow o f au th or it y by H ou se , andev ery en co un te r in vo lv edsubm is si onto th atsh ow o f au th or it y . Reg ard in g t he en co un te r id en ti fie d i n c ou ntfou r, Ri va s t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e ap pe aredto be weari ng “ so m e k in d o f un ifo rm ” whe n h e p ul le d b es id e Ri va s; th at Hou se to ldRiv as to “pu ll ov er”; th atHou se act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts ; tha t Ri va s p ul le d o ve r be cau se th atwas “ wha t an y law- ab id in g c it iz enwou lddo when th ey see bl ue li gh ts ”; an d t ha t af te r Ri va s p ul le d o ve r, Hou se sp ok e to Riv as us in g a “ ve ry scary ” to ne of v oi ce an d t ol d R iv as th atHou se was afed eral off ic er an d

“ was go in g t o g et[Ri va s] for de st ru ct io n o f go ve rn m en t p ro pe rty.” This tes ti m on y en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se sei zedRiv as , eithe r by con du ct in g atra ffi c st op of Riv as , see Whr en , 51 7 U.S. at80 9– 10 , 11 6 S . Ct. at17 72 , or b y de ta in in g R iv as on th e si de of t he roa d t hr ou gh th e u se of wo rd s an d a ct io ns th atwou ldin di cat e to a rea so nabl e p ers onth athe was n otfree t o l eav e, se e Me nd en ha ll , 44 6 U.S. at 55 3– 54 , 10 0 S . Ct. at18 77 . Reg ard in g t he en co un te r id en ti fie d i n c ou ntsev en , W ib el tes ti fie d o n d ire ct ex am in at io n t ha t h e p ul le d o ve r hi s v eh ic le “ba se d o n g et ti ng st op pe d b y . . . two ve hi cl es ” aft er Ho us e an d B eal ha d a ct iv at edth e em erg en cy li gh ts on th ei r res pe ct iv e v eh ic le s. Th is tes ti m on y en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se sei zed W ib el by part ic ip at in g i n atra ffi c st op of Wib el . See Whren , 51 7 U.S. at80 9– 10 , 4411 6 S . Ct. at17 72 . The jury was e nt it le d t o c red itth is tes ti m on y an d n otth e te st im on y of Wib el oncro ss -ex am in at io n tha t s ug ge st edBeal ’s act io ns alo ne cau se d Wib el to st op . See Ri xe y v. W. Pace s Fe rry

Hos p., In c., 91 6 F .2d60 8, 6 16 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 0) (“ A jury is no t re qu ire d t o a ccep t ‘all or n on e’ of a wi tn es s’s te st im on y . . . .”). Inad di ti on , Beal , th e lo cal law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer wh o p art ic ip at edin th e se iz ur e o f W ib el , tes ti fie d t ha t h e d idno t p ers on al ly w it ne ss W ib el dri vi ng ag gr es si ve ly, th athi s o nl y ba si s fo r st op pi ng W ib el was Ho us e’s rad io di sp at ch rep ort, tha t h e h adtre at edHou se ’s rep ort as pro babl e cau se to st op W ib el be cau se Hou se was alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, an d re po rts by law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers are tre at eddi ffer en tl y

th anrep orts by priv at e ci ti zen s. Be al als o t es ti fie d tha t h e h ad arre st edW ib el ba se d o n Ho us e’s acc ou ntof e ve nt s an d Ho us e’s in si st en ce tha t W ib el be arre st ed . Beal be li ev edHou se ’s acco un t o f ev en ts be cau se Hou se was a la w enf or cem en t o ffi cer, an d “ ge ne ral ly a po li ce o ffi cer i s s up po se d t o b e h el d t o a hi gh er s ta nd ardan d g iv e y outh e trut h.” Beal ’s tes ti m on y pro vi de d s uf

fic ie nt ev id en ce fo r th e jury to fi ndth atHou se effe ct edth e se iz ur e o f W ib el th ro ug h a sh ow o f hi s au th or it y

as alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, atth e ti m e o f W ib el ’s st op or hi s arres t. Cf. Fr an ks v. Del aware , 43 8 U.S. 1 54 , 15 6, 9 8 S . Ct. 2 67 4, 2 76 (19 78 ) (h ol di ng th ata fal se or m is le ad in g s ta te m en t i n awarran t af fid av itm ay

co ns ti tu te a 45vi ol at io n o f th e Fo urthAm en dm en t i f th e st at em en t i s “ ne ces sa ry to th e fi nd in g o f pr ob ab le cau se ” requi redforth e is su an ce o f a warrant ). Reg ard in g t he en co un te r id en ti fie d i n c ou ntni ne , McFa rla ndtes ti fie d t ha t Hou se was d riv in g am ark edlaw en fo rcem en t v eh ic le , th atHou se act iv at edhi s em erg en cy

li gh ts , andth atHou se esc orte d M cFar la ndto th e si de of t he roa d i n a m an ne r su gg es ti ng th atHou se in te nd edto co nduc t a t raff ic st op of M cFar la nd . Thi s t es ti m on y

en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se sei zedMcFa rla nd . ThatHou se ab an do ne d h is co ur se of a ct io n b efo re Mc Farl an d b ro ug hthi s v eh ic le to a co m pl et e st op is irr el ev an t b ecau se an y “ m ean in gf

ul in te rfer en ce, h owe ve r br ie f, wit h a n i nd iv idua l’s fre ed om of m ov em en t” co ns ti tu te s a s ei zu re. Ja co bs en , 46 6 U.S. at 1 13 n.5 , 10 4 S . Ct. at16 56 n.5 . Reg ard in g t he en co un te r id en ti fie d i n c ou ntele ve n, Th om ps on tes ti fie d t ha t Hou se m an eu ve redhi s g ov ern m en t v eh ic le so as t o fo rce Th om ps on off th e ro ad an d t he n b lo ck edTho m

ps on ’s rou te ba ck

on to th e ro ad ; tha t o nc e Tho m ps on ha d st op pe d h is ve hi cl e o n t he si de of t he roa d, Ho us e ap pr oa ch edTho m ps on ’s veh ic le wit h a“ ve ry

an gry ” d em ean or , weari ng a po li ce uni fo rm an d agu n, an d wal ke d aro un d t o t he rearof Th om ps on ’s veh ic le an d re co rd edTho m ps on ’s li cen se pl at e nu m be r; t ha t Ho us e la te r in st ru ct edTho m ps on to m ov e h is ve hi cl e fro m th e lo cat io n wh ere h e h adin it ia ll y st op pe d i t t o acem et ery dr iv eway an d l at er t o a

46res taur an t p ark in g l ot ; an d t ha t Th om ps on m ov edhi s v eh ic le “be cau se [Hou se ] to ld[hi m ] to .” Thi s t es ti m on y en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se sei zed Tho m ps on , eit he r by forci ng Tho m ps on off th e ro ad , cf. Bro wer, 4 89 U.S. at 59 7– 99 , 10 9 S . Ct. at13 81 –8 2, o r by det ai ni ng Tho m ps on aft er Th om

ps on st op pe d h is ve hi cl e, se e Me nd enha ll , 44 6 U.S. at55 3– 54 , 10 0 S . Ct. at18 77 .

b. Ev id en ce tha t the Sei zu res W ere Un reas on ab le The go ve rn m en t al so off

eredsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o e st ab li sh th atth e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts fou r, se ve n, n in e, an d e le ve n wer e unr eas on ab le . Ri va s, Wibe l, an d Th om

ps oneach tes ti fie d t ha t the y ha d n otvi ol at edan y

tra ffi c la ws. Thi s t es ti m on y

en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se ha d n ei th er p ro babl e cau se no r rea so nabl e su sp ic io n t o s up po rt h is sei zu res of t ho se th ree m ot or is ts , whi chwou ldm ean th atth os e se iz ur es were u nr eas on ab le , Cha nt ha so ux at , 34 2 F.3 d a t 1 27 5. Alt ho ug h M cFar la ndtes ti fie d t ha t h e was dri vi ng ab ov e th e sp eedli m it whe n h e fi rs t s aw Hou se ’s veh ic le ah eadof h im , McFa rla nd ’s tes ti m on y is far fro m co nc lu si ve ev id en ce o f th e fac ts kn ownto Hou se whenhe sei zedMcFarla nd , se e Bec k, 3 79 U.S. at 9 1, 8 5 S . Ct. at22 5. Be cau se McFa rla ndtes ti fie d t ha t h e sl owe d b efo re h e cau gh t up t o Ho us e, th e jury cou ldreas on ab ly hav e fo un d t ha t Hou se wou ldha ve be enun ab le to tel l M cFar la ndwas s pe ed in g b efo re the sei zu re 47an d t ha t Ho us e h adne ithe r pr ob ab le cau se no r rea so nabl e su sp ic io n t o s up po rt h is

se iz ur e o f McF arl an d. If t he jury so fou nd , itwou ldm ean th atth e se iz ur e was un reas on ab le , Cha nt ha so ux at , 34 2 F .3dat 1 27 5.

c. Evi de nc e th atHou se Acte d Wil lfu ll y The go ve rn m en t al so off

eredsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o e st ab li sh th atHou se act ed“ wil lfu ll y ” whe n h e eff ect edth e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts fou r, se ve n, n in e, an d e le ve n. Th e ri gh t o f m ot or is ts to be free fro m un reas on ab le sei zu res is

“ sp eci fic an d d efi ni te ”: itis de fin ed“by the ex pr es s t erm s o f th e Co ns ti tu ti on ” an d ha s b een“ m ad e sp eci fic ” b y Supr em e Co urt “ de ci si on [s ] in te rp ret in g t he Co ns ti tu ti on ,” so th atth os e who vi ol at e th atrig ht“ are i n n o p os it io n t o s ay th at th ey ha d n o a de qu at e ad va nc e n ot ic e th atth ey wou ldbe vi si te d wi thpu ni sh m en t.” Scre ws, 3 25 U.S. at 1 05 , 65 S. Ct. at10 37 ; s ee Whren , 51 7 U.S. at80 9– 10 , 11 6 S . Ct . at 1 77 2 (e xp la in in g t ha t a t raff ic st op is a se iz ur e); So ko lo w, 49 0 U.S. at7, 1 09 S. Ct . at 1 58 5 (d is cu ss in g re qu ire m en t o f rea so nabl e su sp ic io n) ; Be ck , 37 9 U.S. at 91 , 85 S. Ct. at22 5 (d is cu ss in g re qu ire m en t o f pr ob ab le cau se ). The t es ti m on y of Ri va s, Wibe l, Mc Farl an d, an d Th om ps on est ab li sh eda pa tt ern of c on du ctby Hou se in whi ch he rep eat ed ly seiz edm ot or is ts witho utreg ardforth e requi rem en ts of th e Fo urth Am en dm en t an d t he n a tt em pt edto co nc eal hi s ac ti on s b y m ak in g fal se st at em en ts inhi s i nc id en t re po rts . Pad ge tt ’s, Carav al ho ’s, andKin nam on t’s 48te st im on y

su gg es ts th atHou se ’s beh av io r du rin g the ir e nc ou nt ers with h im fitin to th is same pat te rn . The s he er num be r of un reas on ab le sei zures th atHou se effe ct ed , as well as h is effo rts to pre ve nthi s s up eri or s’ det ect io n o f hi s ac ti on s, en ti tl edth e jury to i nf

er tha t Ho us e act edwil lfu ll y when he effe ct edth e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts fou r, se ve n, n in e, an d e le ve n. Mc Carr ic k, 2 94 F.3dat 1 29 1; Harri s, 2 0 F.3 d a t 4 53 . d. Ev id en ce tha t Ho us e Act edUnd er Co lo r of Law Fi na ll y , th e g ov ern m en t o ffer edsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o e st ab li sh th atHou se act ed“un de r co lo r of

law” when he effec te d t he sei zures ch arg edin co un ts fou r, se ve n, n in e, an d e le ve n. Ri va s t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts as he to ldRiv as to pu ll ov er, tha t Ho us e was weari ng hi s u ni fo rm when he st op pe d Ri va s, an d t ha t Ho us e id en ti fie d h im se lf t o R iv as as afed eral off ic er dur in g the st op . W ib el tes ti fie d t ha t Ho us e act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts as h e an d B eal pu ll edW ib el ov er t o t he si de of t he roa d. Mc Farl an d t es ti fie d t ha t Ho us e was dr iv in g alaw en fo rcem en t v eh ic le an d t ha t Ho us e act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts as he sei zedMcFa rla nd . Tho m ps on tes ti fie d t ha t Ho us e was dri vi ng a la w en fo rcem en t v eh ic le , andth atHou se was wea rin g h is un ifo rm as h e se iz ed Tho m ps on . Riv as ’s, W ib el ’s, McFa rla nd ’s andTho m ps on ’s tes ti m on y

en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se was a ct in g u nd er co lo r of law wh enhe sei zedeach of t ho se 49fo urm ot or is ts . See Cl as si c, 31 3 U.S. at32 6, 6 1 S . Ct. at10 43 . To th e ex te ntth at

Hou se effe ct edth e se iz ur e o f W ib el th ro ug h B eal , Beal ’s tes ti m on y en ti tl edth e jury to fi ndth atHou se effe ct edth is sei zure u nd er co lo r of law. Cf. Al m an d, 1 03 F.3 d a t 1 51 4– 15 (ex pl ai ni ng th ata la w enf or cem en t o ffi cer i s p ro babl y act in g un de r co lo r of

law wh enhe us es “ hi s s ta tu s as a po li ce o ffi cer” to in du ce an ot he r to act ). ThatHou se m ay

ha ve ov ers te pp edhi s au th or it y in effe ct in g t he sei zu res is no de fen se forhi s co nduc t. Cf. Sc rews , 32 5 U.S. at11 1, 6 5 S . Ct. at10 40 ; Alm an d, 1 03 F.3dat 1 51 3.

2. Co nv ic ti on s fo r Mak in g F al se Sta te m en ts Hou se arg ue s t ha t n o re as on ab le jury wou ldha ve co nv ic te d h im on co un ts fiv e, ei gh t, o r twe lv e b ecau se th e rep orts ch arg edin th os e co un ts were co ns is te nt wit h h is co nt em

po ran eo us , ora l ac co un ts of t he rel ev an t s ei zu res , and“ no reas on ab le jury wou ldha ve be li ev ed[he ] [m ad e] up fact s as th ey were h ap pe ni ng an d t he n re m em

be redhi s fi ct it io us st ory

an d m ad e up t he same facts as h e la te r pr ep areda rep ort.” Ho us e al so arg ue s t ha t the re was in su ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o supp ort h is co nv ic ti on s fo r th e v io la ti on s o f se ct io n 1 00 1 c ha rg edin co un ts fiv e, ei gh t, t en , andtwel ve be cau se any fal se st at em en ts in th e in ci de ntrep orts he subm it te d wer e n otm at eri al . Hou se m ai nt ai ns th atth e st at em en ts in th e rep orts were m at eri al on ly to es tabl is h t ha t h e h ad“pr op er caus e” fo r th e se iz ur es 50de sc rib edin th e rep orts , andbe cau se eachof t ho se sei zu res were b as edon

pr ob ab le cau se , “ an y

pu rp orte d m is st at em en t as to th e o th er fa ct s i n t he rep orts was no t m at eri al .” W e d is ag ree. To co nv ic t Ho us e u nd er s ect io n 1 00 1, t he go ve rn m en t h adto pro ve “ (1 ) th at a st at em en t was m ad e; (2) th atitwas fa ls e; (3) th atitwas m at eri al ; (4 ) th atitwas m ad e wit h s pe ci fic in te nt ; an d (5 ) th atitwas wi th inth e juri sd ic ti on of a n a ge nc y of th e Uni te d S ta te s.” Un it edSta te s v . Bof fil -Ri ve ra, 6 07 F.3d73 6, 7 40 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . The fal se st at em en t m ay tak e th e fo rm of anaffi rm at iv e m is rep res en ta ti on or t he co nc eal m en t o f a m at eri al fact . Id.

“ Fal si ty thro ug h c on ceal m en t ex is ts wher e d is cl os ur e o f th e co nc eal edin fo rm at io n is requi redby a sta tu te , go ve rn m en t re gu la ti on , or fo rm .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Cal ho on , 97 F.3d51 8, 5 26 (11 th Cir . 19 96 ). A fals e st at em en t i s m at eri al if i t

“ ha [s ] a n atur al ten de nc y to in flu en ce, o r be cap ab le of i nf lu en ci ng , th e d eci si on of th e d eci si on m ak in g b od y to whi ch itwas a dd res se d” ; p ro of of a ctua l i nf

lu en ce i s no t re qu ire d. Bo ffi l-R iv era, 6 07 F.3dat 7 41 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s an d al te rat io n o m it te d) . The s pe ci fic in te ntrequi redis th e “ in te ntto de cei ve by m ak in g afal se or f

rau du le ntst at em en t.” Un it edSta te s v . Dotha rd , 66 6 F .2d49 8, 50 3 (1 1th C ir. 1 98 2) . An ag en cy ’s juri sd ic ti on en co m pa ss es “ al l m at te rs co nf

id ed to th e au th or it y

of a n a ge nc y

or d ep art m en t,” a ndjuri sd ic ti on requi res on ly tha t the

51ag en cy

po ss es s “ po wer t o e xe rci se au th or it y in a pa rti cu la r si tu at io n.” Uni te d St at es v. Ro dg ers , 46 6 U.S. 4 75 , 47 9, 1 04 S. Ct. 1 94 2, 1 94 6 (1 98 4) .

a. Evi de nc e th atHou se Mad e Fal se Sta te m en ts The go ve rn m en t p ro du cedsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce tha t Ho us e m ad e th e st at em en ts ch arg edinco un ts fiv e, ei gh t, t enan d t welv e an d tha t the st at em en ts were fa ls e. The g ov ern m en t es tabl is he d tha t Ho us e m ad e th e st at em en ts in th e in ci de ntrep orts de sc rib in g Ho us e’s en co un te rs with R iv as , W ib el , McFa rland , and Tho m ps on . Hou se ’s nam e ap pe ars on each of t he rep orts as the fil in g o ffi cer, an d Hou se di sp ut es ne it he r hi s s ub m is si onof t he rep orts no r hi s re sp on si bi li ty for the st at em en ts in th e rep orts . The g ov ern m en t es tabl is he d t he ex is te nc e o f affi rm at iv e m is rep res en ta ti on s an d o m is si on s i n e ach of t he rep orts th ro ug h t he tes ti m on y of Ri va s, Wibe l, Mc Farl an d, an d Th om ps on , each of wh om

tes ti fie d t ha t the rep orts pr ov id edfal se acco un ts of t he ir e nc ou nt ers with Ho us e. Hou se off ers no supp ort fo r th e p ro po si ti on th atno jury co ul d re as on ab ly bel ie ve a de fen da ntcanli e co ns is te nt ly. In a ny even t, the re i s n ot hi ng to su gg es t tha t the tes ti m on y of R iv as , W ib el , McFa rla nd , andTho m ps on is “ in cred ib le as am at te r of law.” Se e Uni te d St at es v. Hewi tt , 66 3 F .2d13 81 , 13 86 (11 th Cir . 19 81 ).

b. Ev id en ce tha t the Fal se Sta te m en ts W ere M at eri al

52The go ve rn m en t es tabl is he d t he m at eri al it y of t he fal se st at em en ts ch arg ed in co un ts fiv e, ei gh t, t en , andtwel ve th ro ug h t he tes ti m on y of An dr ews an d Din gm an . Andrews tes ti fie d t ha t Fe de ral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce s up erv is or s u se th es e rep orts to de te rm in e whe th er the off ic ers ’ co nduc t was au th or iz edan d tha t o th er la w enf or cem en t ag en ts so m et im es us e th e rep orts in co nn ect io n wi th cri m in al pr os ecu ti on s. An dr ews ex pl ai ne d t ha t, fo r a rep ort t o b e u se fu l fo r ei th er o f th es e pu rp os es , an o ffi cer m

us t p ro vi de tru th fu l i nf

orm at io n a s t o a ll of t he fact s an d ci rcu m st an ces surro un di ng th e ev en ts do cu m en te d i n the rep ort. Din gm anoff ered si m il ar t es ti m on y

th atanoff

ic er’s p ro vi si on of “ a true an d a ccu rat e fac tu al acco un t” of e ve nt s i n e ach po li ce re po rt h e fi le s i s “ m at eri al to hi s dut ie s as a fed eral po li ce o ffi cer.” He tes ti fie d t ha t the go ve rn m en t u se s t he rep orts in de ci di ng whet he r to in it ia te cri m in al pro se cu ti on s, tha t i t was “ ve ry im po rta nt ” th ata rep ort i nc lu de tru th fu l i nf orm at io n i n re la ti on to “ al l o f th e fac ts of t he cas e, th e who , what , when , wher e, an d h ow o f th e cas e,” an d tha t fa ls e st at em en ts in a rep ort co ul d ru in an y

cas e th e g ov ern m en t at te m pt s t o p ur su e b as edup on ev en ts de sc rib edin th atrep ort. An dr ews ’s andDin gm an ’s tes ti m on y refu te s Ho us e’s arg um en t tha t n otall of t he st at em en ts in th e rep orts were m at eri al .

c. Evi de nc e th atHou se Acte d wi th Sp eci fic Int en t t o Dec ei ve

53The go ve rn m en t al so pre se nt edsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce tha t Ho us e h adth e in te nt

to de cei ve when he m ad e th e fal se st at em en ts ch arg edin co un ts fiv e, ei gh t, t en , an d t welv e. Becaus e “ [s ]peci fic in te ntto de frau d c anbe di ffi cu ltto pro ve ,” Uni te d S ta te s v . Eth rid ge , 94 8 F .2d12 15 , 12 17 (11 thCir . 19 91 ), “ [w]e hav e h el d th at§ 1 00 1 c on vi ct io ns ch al le ng edon su ffi ci en cy of t he ev id en ce g ro un ds canbe affi rm edba se d o n afin di ng th ata jury reaso nabl y co ul d i nf er fro m cir cu m st an ti al ev id en ce tha t the de fen da nt s ac te d kno win gl y an d wi ll fu ll y ,” Uni te d S ta te s v . Gafy czk , 84 7 F .2d68 5, 6 92 (11 th Cir . 19 88 ); s ee al so McC arri ck , 29 4 F .3dat 12 91 ; Un it edSta te s v . Hern an do Osp in a, 79 8 F .2d15 70 , 15 81 (11 th Cir . 19 86 ). Ci rcu m st an ti al ev id en ce s up po rts th atin fere nc e h ere. An dr ews , Glynn , Reed , and Din gm antes ti fie d t ha t the po li cy of t he Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce p ro hi bi te d tra ffi c st op s fo r m in ortra ffi c v io la ti on s o ut si de of f ed eral pro pe rty, Hous e was fam il ia r wit h t ha t p ol ic y , Hou se ha d b een rep rimand edrep eat ed ly andsubjec te d t o anin te rn al ag en cy

in ve st ig at io n fo r vi ol at io ns of t he po li cy , andHou se ’s veh ic ul ar pr iv il eg es ha d b een tem

po rari ly sus pe nd edas ares ul t o f th e in te rn al in ve st ig at io n. And rews an d Di ng m antes ti fie d t ha t Ho us e was requi redto fil e anin ci de ntrep ort each ti m e h e act iv at edhi s emergen cy li gh ts or c on du ct eda tr affi c st op an d t ha t Hou se ’s supe rv is or s u se d t ho se rep orts to de te rm in e whe th er h is act io ns were pe rm it te d. Ba se d o n t he tes ti m on y of R iv as , W ib el , McFa rla nd , andTho m ps on , 54th e en co un te rs Hou se rep orte d v io la te d a ge nc y po li cy . The jury

co ul d re as on ab ly ha ve in ferr edth atHou se m ad e fal se st at em en ts inth e in ci de ntrep orts with the sp eci fic in te ntto de cei ve hi s s up erv is or s t o a vo idfurth er d is ci pl in e fo r vi ol at io ns of ag en cy po li cy . d. Evid en ce tha t the Sta te m en ts W ere Withi n t he Juris di ct io n o f a Feder al Age nc y Fi na ll y , th e fal se st at em en ts ch arg edin co un ts fiv e, ei gh t, t en , andtwel ve were wi th in th e juri sd ic ti on of afed eral ag en cy . Hou se ’s rep orts of h is en co un te rs wit h R iv as , W ib el , McFa rla nd , andTho m ps on were “ m at te rs co nf

id edto th e au th or it y of” th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce, o ve r whi ch th e ag en cy po ss es se d

“po wer t o e xe rci se au th or ity .” Ro dg ers , 46 6 U.S. at47 9, 1 04 S. Ct. at19 46 . W e ha ve expl ai ne d t ha t “ [s ]ecti on 10 01 is ne ces saril y co uc he d i n v ery br oa d t erm s t o en co m pa ss th e v ari ety

of d ecep ti ve pra ct ic es whi ch in ge ni ou s i nd iv idua ls m ig ht pe rp etrat e upo n an i nc reas in gl y co m pl ex go ve rn m en t” an d h el d t ha t, wh ere a fed eral ag en cy

co m m on ly use s an off

ic ia l fo rm “ in th e p erfo rm an ce o f it s re gu la rly co nduc te d a ct iv it ie s,” t he subm is si on of aco m pl et edform

to th atag en cy

sat is fie s th e juri sd ic ti on al requi rem en t o f se ct io n 1 00 1. Gafyczk, 8 47 F.2dat 6 90 –9 1 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s an d a lt erat io n o m it te d) . Test im on y by And rews an d Din gm anest ab li sh edth atth e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce an d o th er fe de ral law

55en fo rcem en t ag en ci es us edth e in ci de ntrep orts in th e p erfo rm an ce o f th ei r reg ul ar

act iv it ie s. Cf. i d. at69 1. B. The Distri ct

Co ur t Erre d w he n It

Ins tr uc te d tha t a Se iz ur e Eff ect ed W itho ut Ju risdic ti on or

Autho ri tyVio la tes the Fou rth Amen dme nt , bu t the Dis tr ic t Co ur t Did No t Othe rw is e Err

in it s Ju ryCh ar

ge . W e d iv id e o urdi sc us si on of Ho us e’s arg um en ts ab ou t the jury in st ru ct io ns in to two pa rts . Firs t, we ad dr es s Ho us e’s ch al le ng es to fou r in st ru ct io ns in cl ud ed in th e jury char ge . Seco nd , we add res s Ho us e’s ch al le ng es to th e o m is si on of f iv e in st ru ct io ns fro m

th e jury char ge . 1. In st ru ct io ns Inc lu de d i n t he Ju ry Ch arg e On ap pe al , Hou se ch al le ng es fou r in st ru ct io ns in cl ud edinth e jury char ge . Fi rs t, Ho us e arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt erredwhen itin st ru ct edth e jury tha t a tra ffi c st op is un reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t wh en ev er ef fect edby a la w enf or cem en t o ffi cer wi th ou t juris di ct io n o r au th or it y . Seco nd , Hou se m ai nt ai ns th atth e d is tri ctco urt erredwhen itin st ru ct edth e jury tha t an in it ia ll y va li d t raff

ic st op co ul d d ev el op in to anun reas on ab le de te nt io n wi th ou t di st in gu is hi ng be twee n s to ps ba se d o n re as on ab le su sp ic io n a ndst op s b as edon pr ob ab le cau se . Thir d, Ho us e arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt p la in ly erredwhen it in st ru ct edth e jury onth e d efi ni ti on of “ wil lfu ll y ” u nd er s ect io n 2 42 be cau se it s in st ru ct io ns fai le d t o e xp la in th atHou se m us t h av e act edwitho utpro babl e cau se 56an d n otm erel y co nt rary to ag en cy

po li cy to ha ve vi ol at edsec ti on 24 2. Fo urth , Hou se arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt p la in ly erredwhen itin stru ct edth e jury tha t th e st at em en ts in th e in ci de ntrep orts he subm it te d t o t he Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Serv ic e co nc ern eda “ m at te r withi n t he juri sd ic ti on of” a fed eral ag en cy un de r se ct io n 1 00 1. We agre e th atth e d is tri ctco urt erredwhen itin st ru ct edth e jury tha t a tr affi c st op effe ct edwitho utjuri sd ic ti on or aut ho rit y is un reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urthAm en dm en t, b utco nc lu de th atHou se ’s ot he r arg um en ts fai l. The di stric t co urt m is st at edth e la w when itin st ru ct edth e jury tha t a t raff ic st op is un reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t i f itis effe ct edwitho ut juri sd ic ti on or aut ho rit y . The Supr em e Co urt h as he ldth ata tr affi c st op is reas on ab le un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t wh ensupp orte d b y pro babl e cau se or reas on ab le su sp ic io n e ve n i f itis in co ns is te ntwith a ge nc y po li cy , see Whr en , 51 7 U.S. at 8 13 –1 6, 1 16 S. Ct. at17 74 –7 6, o r st at e la w, see Mo or e, 55 3 U.S. at 17 3– 76 , 12 8 S . Ct. at16 05 –0 7. Se e al so Ch an th as ou xa t, 3 42 F.3dat 1 27 5. Th e in st ru ct io n b y

th e d is tri ctco urt al lo wedth e jury to c on vi ctHou se for th e un reas on ab le sei zu res ch arg edin co un ts on e, two , th ree, fo ur , si x, s ev en , ni ne , and el ev enif t he y

fou ndth atHou se lac ke d e it he r (1 ) pr ob ab le cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n, o r (2 ) juri sd ic ti on or aut ho rit y to effe ctth e se iz ur es ch arg edin th os e

57co un ts . Thatis , th e d is tri ctco urt i ns tru ct edth e jury tha t Ho us e co ul d b e co nv ic te d

ev enif the y

fou ndth athe ha d p ro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n. Thi s erro r inth e jury char ge requi res rev ers al of Ho us e’s co nv ic ti on s o n co un ts on e, two , th ree, an d s ix , bu t i t was ha rm le ss with re sp ectto hi s re m ai ni ng co nv ic ti on s fo r wil lfu l u nr eas on ab le sei zures . The g ov ern m en t p res en te d e vi de nc e th atHou se lac ke d aut ho rity or ju ris di ct io n t o e ffec t the sei zu res with wh ic h h e h ad be ench arg ed , andHou se ’s con vi ct io ns forwil lfu l unr eas on ab le sei zures , st an di ng al on e, do no t t el l u s wh ethe r th e jury fou ndth atHou se lac ke d p ro babl e cau se or reas on ab le su sp ic io n fo r th e se iz ur es un de rlyin g tho se co nv ic ti on s. Bu t h is co nv ic ti on s o n c ou nt s fo ur , sev en , ni ne , andele ve n d o n otst an d a lo ne ; the y st an d to ge th er wi th hi s co nv ic ti on s fo r m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts . The jury fou ndHou se gu il ty of m ak in g fa ls e st at em en ts in th e in ci de ntrep orts wher e h e d es cri be d t he se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts fou r, se ve n, n in e, an d e le ve n, wh ic h m ean s t ha t the jury cred it edth e m ot or is ts ’ acco un ts of t ho se sei zu res an d d is cred it edHou se ’s acco un ts of t ho se sei zu res . The fi nd in g tha t Ho us e’s rep orts were fa ls e n eces sa ril y m ean s t ha t Ho us e la ck edpro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n fo r th os e se iz ur es . Becau se of t hi s fi nd in g, t he erro ne ou s ju ry in st ru ct io n c ou ldno t h av e co nt rib ut edto th e jury’ s v erd ic t wi th res pe ctto co un ts fou r, se ve n, n in e, an d

58el ev en , andwe co nc lu de th atth e err orwas h arm le ss as t o t ho se fou r co un ts . See

Ch ap m an , 38 6 U.S. at24 , 87 S. Ct. at82 8. W e n eedno t d eci de whet he r th e d is tri ctco urt erredwhenitin st ru ct edth e jury thatanin it ia ll y

va li d t raff

ic st op co ul d d ev el op in to anun reas on ab le de te nt io n, b ecau se th aterro r is harm le ss as t o Ho us e’s rem ai ni ng co nv ic ti on s fo r wil lfu l u nr eas on ab le sei zu res . The jury fou ndth atth e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts fo ur , sev en , ni ne , andele ve n wer e n otsupp orte d b y pro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n s o t he jury wou ldha ve ha d n o o ccas io n t o app ly the in st ru ct io n i n i ts co ns id erat io n o f th os e se iz ur es . The i ns tru ct io n c ou ldno t h av e co nt rib ut edto th e jury’ s v erd ic t wi th res pe ctto an y of t ho se fou r co un ts . See i d. The di stric t co urt d idno t err, pl ai nl y or o th erwi se , when itin st ru ct edth e jury abo utth e d efi ni ti on of “ wil lfu ll y ” u nd er s ect io n 2 42 or wh enitin st ru ct edth e jury thatth e st at em en ts inth e in ci de ntrep orts Hou se subm it te d t o t he Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce were m at te rs withi n t he juri sd ic ti on of afed eral ag en cy . The de fin it io n o f “ wil lfu ll y ” in th e jury char ge was c on si st en t wi th th e d efi ni ti onof th atterm pro vi de d b y

th e Supr em e Co urt i n S crews , 32 5 U.S. at10 1– 07 , 65 S. Ct. at10 35 –3 8. If t he in st ru ct io ns di d n otm ak e cl ear t ha t Ho us e m us t h av e act ed wit ho utpro babl e cau se an d n otm erel y co nt rary to ag en cy

po li cy to ha ve vi ol at ed se ct io n 2 42 , th atlac k o f cl ari ty w as du e to th e err on eo us de fin it io n o f 59un reas on ab le ne ss un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t. The di st ric t co urt co rrec tl y

in st ru ct edth e jury tha t the st at em en ts in th e in ci de ntrep orts Hou se subm it te d t o th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce co nc ern eda “ m at te r wit hi n t he juri sd ic ti on of” a fed eral ag en cy

un de r se ct io n 1 00 1 b ecau se th e Fed eral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce i s a fed eral ag en cy

th atus es in ci de ntrep orts fil edby its off ic ers in it s re gu la r co ur se of bu si ne ss . Whe re a fe de ral ag en cy us es a fo rm

in it s re gu la r co ur se of b us in es s, the in fo rm at io n p ro vi de d o n tha t fo rm is a m at te r wit hi n t he juri sd ic ti onof t he fed eral ag en cy . See Gafyczk, 8 47 F.2dat 6 90 –9 1.

2. In st ru ct io ns Om it te d fr om th e Ju ry Ch arg e Hou se als o c ha ll en ge s t he om is si onof f ou r in st ru ct io ns fro m

th e jury ch arg e. Fir st , Hou se arg ue s tha t the di st ric t co urt ab us edit s d is cret io n wh enit fai le d t o i ns tru ctth e jury tha t the Fo urth Am en dm en t p erm it s arres ts form in or tra ffi c v io la ti on s co m

m it te d i n alaw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer’s p res en ce. Sec on d, Hou se arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt ab us edit s d is cret io n wh enitfai le d t o i ns tru ct th e jury tha t Ho us e co ul d n otbe co nv ic te d o f vi ol at in g s ect io n 2 42 un le ss he ha d fai r warn in g t ha t h is co nduc t was un la wfu l. Thi rd , Hou se arg ue s tha t the di st ric t co urt ab us edit s d is cret io n wh enitfai le d t o i ns tru ctth e jury tha t a l aw en fo rcem en t of fic er’s s ub

jecti ve in te ntis irr el ev an t t o t he reas on ab le ne ss of atra ffi c st op un de r th e Fo urthAm en dm en t. Fo urth , Hou se arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt ab us edit s 60di sc ret io n wh enitfai le d t o i ns tru ctth e jury tha t the reas on ab le ne ss of atra ffi c st op

un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t i s n otde pe nd en t upo n s ta te law o r lo cal ag en cy po li cy . Fift h, Ho us e arg ue s tha t the di st ric t co urt ab us edit s d is cret io n wh enit fai le d t o i ns tru ctth e jury tha t Geo rg ialaw p erm it s ci ti zen s’ arres ts form in or tra ffi c v io la ti on s. No ne of t he se om is si on s warran ts rev ers al of Ho us e’s co nv ic ti on s fo r co un ts fou r, fiv e, se ve n, ei gh t, n in e, te n, el ev en , or t welv e. The di stric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n wh enitrefu se d t o i ns tru ctth e jury on t he is su e o f fai r warn in g. “ [T]he is su e o f whe th er a [l aw] is v oi d fo r va gu en es s i s a que st io n o f la w forth e co urt t o d et erm in e,” wh ic h m ean s t ha t

“ de fen da nt s [a re] no t en ti tl edto a ‘fair warn in g’ in st ru ct io n t o the jury. ” Uni te d St at es v. Pa rad ie s, 9 8 F .3d12 66 , 12 84 (11 th Cir . 19 96 ). The rem ai ni ng fou r omiss io ns fro m th e jury char ge , eve n i f erro ne ou s, were ha rm le ss . Becau se th e jury foundth atth e se iz ur es ch arg edin co un ts fou r, se ve n, ni ne , andele ve n wer e n otsupp orte d b y pro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n, i t wou ldha ve be enirr el ev an t t o t he jury’ s co ns id erat io n o f th os e se iz ur es th atth e Fo urthAm en dm en t p erm it s arres ts form in ortra ffi c v io la ti on s, tha t a l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer’s s ub jecti ve in te ntis irr el ev an t t o t he reas on ab le ne ss of a tra ffi c st op un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t, tha t the reas on ab le ne ss of atra ffi c st op un de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t i s n otde pe nd en t upo n s ta te law o r lo cal ag en cy 61po li cy , andth atGeor gi a la w perm it s ci ti zen s’ arres ts formin ortra ffi c v io la ti on s.

Norwere an y

of t ho se in st ru ct io ns rel ev an t t o t he jury’ s co ns id erat io n o f th e vi ol at io ns of s ect io n 1 00 1 c ha rg edin co un ts fiv e, ei gh t, t en , andtwel ve . The om is si on of t ho se in st ru ct io ns co ul d n othave co nt rib ut edto th e jury’ s v erd ic t wi th res pe ctto an y

of t he rem ai ni ng eig htco un ts . See Ch ap m an , 38 6 U.S. at24 , 87 S. Ct . at 8 28 . C. Th e Dis tr ic t Co ur t Di d N ot Err in Its Man ag emen t o

f the Tri al . Hou se arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt i napp ro pr ia te ly int erject edit se lf i nt o t he tri al twi ce. Fi rs t, Ho us e m ai nt ai ns th atth e d is tri ctco urt re in fo rcedanin co rrec t st at em en t o f la w by th e p ro se cu to r. Seco nd , Hou se co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctco urt di rect edth e g ov ern m en t as to ho w bes t t o p ro ve it s ca se . W e ad dr es s ea ch of th es e arg um en ts in tu rn . 1. Co m m en t Re ga rd in g Leg al it y of S ei zu re wi th Pro babl e Cau se Hou se m ai nt ai ns th atth e p ro se cu to r in co rrec tl y st at edth e la w whenhe as ke d R eed , “ If [Fe de ral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce o ffi cers ] ha ve pro babl e cau se to m ak e a tr affi c st op , th ey

are v io la ti ng th e ci vi l ri gh ts of t he m ot or is ts ? ” Hou se arg ue s th atth e d is tri ctco urt re in fo rcedth atin co rrec t s ta te m en t o f la w when Hou se ob jecte d t o t he qu es ti on onth e b as is th atitwas “ no t tru e,” an d t he di st ric t co urt res po nd ed , “ It i s t oo . It’s g otso m e if’s andan d’s t o i t. We are ge tt in g t o t he if 62pa rt. I t hi nky ouare fa rafi el d [s ic ]. ” Hou se als o a rg ue s t ha t the pro se cu to r

rei nf or cedth e in co rrec t s ta te m en t o f la w aga in when , sh ortl y aft er the di st ric t jud ge ’s st at em en t, the pro se cu to r as ke d R eed , “ If [Fe de ral Pro te ct iv e Servi ce of fic ers ] ha ve pro babl e cau se an d t he y do de ta inth e in di vi du al , th ey ha ve do ne so m ethi ng un la wfu l? ” Acco rd in g t o Ho us e, th e rei nf or cem en t o f th e in co rrec t st at em en t o f la w was “pr ejud ic ia l p la in erro r,” an d t he pro se cu to r’s la te r rei nf or cem en t o f th e in co rrec t s ta te m en t o f la w in crea se d t he pre jud ic e cau se d b y th e fi rs t m is st at em en t. Inad di ti on , Hou se arg ue s t ha t n o c ur at iv e in st ru ct io n i n t he jury charg e co ul d h av e rem ed ie d t he pre jud ic ia l i m

pa ctof t he m is st at em en t o f la w be cau se th e m is st at em en t m ay ha ve in flu en cedth e jury’ s i m pr es si on of t he ev id en ce wh enitwas p res en te d a t tria l. We dis ag ree. The di stric t co urt d idno t p la in ly err when itm ad e th e co m m en t atis su e.

“ W e wil l n otrev ers e a co nv ic ti on ba se d upo n c omm en ts of t he tri al jud ge un le ss th e co m m en ts are s o p reju di ci al as t o am ou ntto de ni al of afai r tr ia l,” Un it ed St at es v. Ra m os , 93 3 F .2d96 8, 9 73 (11 th Cir . 19 91 ), an d we h av e fre qu en tl y he ld th ata si ng le is ol at edco m m en t dur in g alen gt hy tria l i s i ns uf fic ie nt ly prejud ic ia l t o requi re re ve rs al of acri m in al co nv ic ti on , see , e.g., Un it edSta te s v . Bro wn, 4 41 F.3 d 1 33 0, 1 35 8 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 6) ; Ch an dl er v . Mo or e, 24 0 F .3d90 7, 9 12 –1 3 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 01 ). W e are no t co nv in cedth ateithe r th e d is tri ctjud ge ’s comm en t al on e o r 63th e co m

bi ne d i m pa ctof t ha t co m

m en t an d t he pro se cu to r’s qu es ti on s af fect edth e ou tc om e o f Hou se ’s tri al . The d is tri ctco urt i ns tru ct edth e jury tha t the y co ul d n ot ba se th ei r ve rd ic t o n s ta te m en ts by the pa rti es ’ at to rn ey s o r it s o wn co m m en ts , ex cep t fo r it s i ns tru ct io ns to th em reg ard in g t he ap pl ic ab le law, an d we m us t as su m e th e jury fol lo wedth es e in st ru ct io ns . Uni te d S ta te s v . But le r, 10 2 F .3d 11 91 , 11 96 (11 th Cir . 19 97 ). Nor ar e we co nv in cedth atth e d is tri ctjud ge ’s co m m en t u ndul y

in flu en cedth e jury durin g t he pre se nt at io n o f th e ev id en ce. The di st ric t co urt h adin st ru ct edth e jury befo re the tri al be gan n otto all ow t he ir “ fir st im pr es si on s” to “ co nt ro l” whatth ey th ou gh t an d n otto “ st artm ak in g up [t he ir] m in d[ s]” ab ou t the ve rd ic t u nt il th ey ha d “ he ardth e who le cas e.” Andbe cau se th e di st ric t co urt s us ta in edHou se ’s ob jecti onto th e p ro se cu to r’s qu es ti on imm ed ia te ly aft er m ak in g t he co m

m en t atis su e, itis un li ke ly tha t the jury pe rcei ve d t he co m m en t as anen do rs em en t o f th e g ov ern m en t’s p os it io n. In an y ev en t, n ei th er th e d is tri ctjud ge ’s comm en t al on e n orth e co m bi ne d i m pa ctof tha t co m

m en t an d th e p ro se cu to r’s qu es ti on s co ul d h av e p reju di cedHou se with re sp ectto co un ts fo ur , sev en , ni ne , or e le ve n b ecau se , as we h av e al read y ex pl ai ne d, t he jury fo un d th atth e se iz ur es ch arg edin th os e co un ts were n otsupp orte d b y pro babl e cau se or reas on ab le su sp ic io n.

2. St at em en t Re ga rd in g P ro du ct io n o f Co urt Re co rd s 64Hou se arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt erredwhen itst at edth atitwou ldob ta in

th e co urt re co rd s tha t ex pl ai ne d t he di sm is sa l o f Kin na m on t’s ch arg es if t he pr os ecu to r di d n otha ve th em be fo re the tri al was o ve r be cau se “ th e jury need [ed ] to kn ow” why th e ch arg es were d is m is se d. Acco rd in g t o Ho us e, th is st at em en t am ou nt edto a “ di rect [io n] [to ] th e g ov ern m en t as to th e ev id en ce i t n eed edto pr ov e to th e jury.” Hous e al so co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctjud ge ’s in si st en ce tha t the jury see the co urt re co rd s m ay ha ve in flu en cedth e jury’ s d et erm in at io n o f whe th er Hou se ha d p ro babl e cau se to st op Kin na m on t. We dis ag ree. The di stric t co urt d idno t p la in ly err. “ A di st ric t co urt ju dg e h as wid e di sc ret io n i n m an ag in g t he pro ceed in gs [;] he m ay co m m en t o n t he ev id en ce, qu es ti on witne ss es , eli ci t fa ct s n oty etad du cedor c larif y th os e p rev io us ly pr es en te d, an d m ai nt ai n t he pa ce o f a tria l b y in te rrupt in g o r cu tt in g o ff co un se l as a m atte r of

di sc ret io n.” Uni te d S ta te s v . Day , 40 5 F .3d12 93 , 12 97 (11 thCir . 20 05 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . Andwe ha ve pre vi ou sl y he ldth ata di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e h is di sc ret io n i n m an ag in g t he tri al wher e h e “ fo un d th e te st im on y

of awitne ss to be co nf

us in g a ndsu gg es te d t o t he go ve rn m en t the m an ne r in whi chitmig htbe cla rif ie d.” Id. We are u np ers ua de d t ha t the st at em en t atis su e h ere was su ffi ci en tl y pre jud ic ia l t o h av e d en ie d Ho us e a fai r tr ia l. See Ram os , 93 3 F .2dat 9 73 . The d is tri ctco urt i ns tru ct edth e jury to “ di sr eg ard 65an yth in g [t he di stric t co urt] m ig htha ve sai d dur in g t he tri al ” ex cep t i ts in st ru ct io ns

on th e la w “ in arri vi ng at [ th ei r] deci si onco nc ern in g t he fact s o f th is cas e,” an d

“ no t [t o] ass um e fro m

anyth in g [i t] m ay

ha ve sai d dur in g [t he ] tri al ” th atit“ ha [d ] an y op in io n c on cern in g any of th e is su es in[th e] case .” Thes e in st ru ct io ns pr ecl ud edth e jury from

co ns id eri ng th e st at em en t atis su e in ap pr ai si ng th e ev id en ti ary si gn ifi can ce o f th e co urt re co rd s. Th e d is tri ctco urt al so in st ru ct edth e jury to “ rel y

on ly on the fact s kno wn t o [Ho us e] befo re the st op was m ad e” i n de te rm in in g wh ethe r Hou se ha d p ro babl e cau se or r eas on ab le su sp ic io n fo r a s to p. Thi s i ns tru ct io n p recl ud edth e jury from rel y in g o n t he ev en tu al di sm is sa l o f Kin nam on t’s ch arg es in de te rm in in g wh ethe r Hou se ha d p ro babl e cau se to st op Kin nam on t. We m

us t as su m e th e jury fol lo wedall in st ru ct io ns gi ve n t o t he m . Bu tl er, 1 02 F.3dat 1 19 6. D. The Distri ct

Co ur t Di d N

ot Err wh en It Exc lu de d Evi de nc e. Hou se co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctco urt ab us edit s d is cret io n wh enitex cl ud ed te st im on y co nc ern in g atra ffi c st op forwhi ch Hou se ha d n otbe ench arg edan d te st im on y ab ou t Geo rg ialaw re ga rd in g t raff ic st op s an d a rres ts , bu t we d is ag ree. Test im on y

co nc ern in g atra ffi c st op forwhi ch Hou se ha d n otbe ench arg edwas irr el ev an t t o a ny iss ue of f actbe fo re the jury, an d t he di st ric t co urt co rrec tl y ex cl ud edit . See Fed . R. Evi d. 4 01 , 40 2. The di st ric t co urt al so co rrec tl y 66ex cl ud edtes ti m on y ab ou t Geo rg ialaw. “ Dom es ti c la w is pro pe rly con si de redan d de te rm in edby the co urt wh os e fu nc ti on itis to in st ru ctth e jury onth e law; do m es ti c la w is no t t o b e p res en te d t hr ou gh tes ti m on y an d a rg ue d t o t he jury as a qu es ti on of f

act .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Oli ve ro s, 2 75 F.3d12 99 , 13 06 –0 7 (1 1th C ir. 20 01 ). E. Ther e W

as No Co mment ar

y o n Ho us e’s Fai lu re to Tes ti fy . Hou se arg ue s t ha t the pro se cu to r im pr op erl y co m m en te d o n Ho us e’s de ci si on no t t o t es ti fy

when th e p ro se cu to r rem ark edto th e jury durin g h is clo si ng arg um en t i n re fere nc e to Hou se ’s enc ou nt ers with P ad ge tt , “ W e d on ’t hav e th e de fen da nt ’s ver si on of t ha t s to p b ecau se th ere i s n o re po rt abo utth aton e. The on ly evi de nc e y ouha ve th eref or e is th atI wasn ’t do in g a nyth in g wro ng bu t dr iv in g d own th e ro adin th e le ft- ha ndlan e an d I g otst op pe d fo r ag gr es si ve dr iv in g b ot h t im es .” Hou se als o c on te nd s t ha t the di st ric t co urt co m po un de d t hi s erro r whe n i t fa il edto in st ru ctth e jury tha t the y were n otpe rm it te d t o d raw an y adve rs e in fere nc es fro m

Hou se ’s dec is io n n otto tes ti fy . Thes e arg um en ts fai l. The pro se cu to r di d n otco m m en t o n Ho us e’s fai lu re t o t es ti fy . A pro se cu to r co m m en ts on a de fen da nt ’s in vo cat io n o f hi s ri gh t n otto tes ti fy if t he

“pr os ecu to r’s rem ark s wer e m an ife st ly int en de d t o u rg e th e jury to draw an in fere nc e fro m

th e d efen da nt ’s si le nc e th athe or s he is gu il ty,” or if “ a jury woul d 67na tu ral ly andne ces sa ril y co ns tru e th e p ro se cu to r’s rem ark s as in vi ti ng su ch an im pe rm is si bl e in fere nc e.” Uni te d S ta te s v . Tho m ps on , 42 2 F .3d12 85 , 12 99 (11 th Ci r. 20 05 ). Whe th er the se co nd it io ns are s at is fie d “ can be de te rm in edon ly by ex am in in g t he co nt ex t i n wh ic h t he st at em en t was m ad e.” Id . Here, th e pr os ecu to r ob se rv edth atHou se ha d n otfil eda rep ort d oc um en ti ng hi s s to ps of Pad ge ttto em

ph as iz e th e fac t tha t the on ly evi de nc e rel at in g t o tho se st op s was Pad ge tt ’s tes ti m on y , whi ch pro ve d t ha t Ho us e d idno t h av e p ro babl e cau se to st op Pad ge tt . The p ro se cu to r’s rem ark s en co ur ag edth e jury to c on vi ctHou se ba se d o n Pad ge tt ’s tes ti m on y , no t Ho us e’s si le nc e, an d t he re i s n o b as is for us to co nc lu de th ata jury w ou ldha ve co ns tru edth os e rem ark s i n any oth er m an ne r. Cf. id . (h ol di ng th ata pr os ecu to r’s rem ark s wer e n otim pr op er wh ere t he y

were i nt en de d to di sc ou rag e anim

pr op er p os it iv e in fere nc e fro m th e fac t tha t o ne co de fen da nt di d t es ti fy

rathe r th anto en co ur ag e anim pr op er n eg at iv e in fere nc e fro m th e fac t th atth e o th er co de fen da ntdi d n ottes ti fy ). Inad di ti on , Hou se ha s wai ve d h is rig htto ch al le ng e h is co nv ic ti on on th e ba si s o f th e d is tri ctjud ge ’s fai lu re t o i ns tru ctth e jury tha t the y co ul d n otdra w any adve rs e in fere nc es fro m

Hou se ’s fai lu re t o t es ti fy . Whe n t he di stric t co urt o ffer ed to cal l the jury ba ckin to th e co urtro om an d p ro vi de su chanin st ru ct io n, Ho us e’s co un se l re sp on de d, “ W e are fin e as itis . W e d on ’t askth aty oubri ng th em ba ck .” 68Thi s re sp on se co ns ti tu te d a n i nv it at io n o f th e o m is si on th atHou se no w

ch arac te riz es as e rro r, whi ch m ean s we a re p recl ud edfro m rev ie win g t he all eg ed erro r onap pe al . See Si lv es tri , 40 9 F .3dat 1 33 7. F. Hous e’s Arg ume nt

Abo ut Ine ff ect iv e Ass is ta nc e o

f Co un se l Will

No t Be Revi ewe d o n Di re ct

App ea l . Hou se arg ue s fo r th e fi rs t t im e in hi s re pl y bri ef tha t h is co un se l was in effe ct iv e fo r hi s fa il ur e to ren ew hi s m ot io n fo r acqui tt al at t he clo se of a ll th e ev id en ce, b ut“ ex cep t i n t he rare in st an ce wh enth e rec or d i s s uf fic ie nt ly de ve lo pe d, we wi ll no t ad dr es s cl ai m s fo r in effe ct iv e as si st an ce o f co un se l o n di rectap pe al ,” Uni te d S ta te s v . Merr il l, 5 13 F.3d12 93 , 13 08 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s an d a lt erat io n o m it te d) . “ In st ead , an i ne ffec ti ve as si st an ce o f co un se l cl ai m is pro pe rly rais edin a co ll at eral att ackon th e co nv ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C. § 2 25 5.” Id. (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s an d a lt erat io n om it te d) . Mor eo ve r, be cau se Hou se rai se d h is cla im of i ne ffec ti ve ass is ta nc e fo r th e fi rs t t im e in hi s re pl y

bri ef, we wo ul d n otrev ie w itev enif t he reco rdwere fu ll y de ve lo pe d. Se e Uni te d S ta te s v . Dict er, 1 98 F.3d12 84 , 12 89 (11 th Cir . 19 99 ). G. Ther e W as No Cu mulat iv e Err or . Hou se als o a rg ue s tha t the cu m ul at iv e eff

ectof t he erro rs he ha s al le ge d o n ap pe al de pr iv edhi m

of afai r tr ia l, b utwher e th ere i s n o e rro r or on ly a sin gl e 69erro r, th ere c anbe no cu m ul at iv e err or , see Uni te d S ta te s v . W al do n, 3 63 F.3d 11 03 , 11 10 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ). Becaus e Hou se ha s i de nt ifi edon ly a sin gl e err orin th is ap pe al , hi s ar gu m en t o f cu m ul at iv e erro r fai ls . II I. CONCLUSI ON W e VACATE Hou se ’s con vi ct io ns on co un ts on e, two , th ree, an d s ix . W e AFFIRM Hou se ’s con vi ct io ns on co un ts fou r, fiv e, se ve n, ei gh t, n in e, te n, el ev en , an d t welv e. W e REMAND forfurth er p ro ceed in gs co ns is te ntwith t hi s o pi ni on .

70