FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT NOV 2 , 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK

Honora ble Thomas M. Reavley, United States Circuit Judg e for the United States Court * of Appe als for theFifth Circuit, sitting by designation. [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 10869

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 3 - 8 0 0 9 1 - CR- J CP U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s P A T R I C K K N I G H T O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 2, 2006) B efo re P R Y O R , F A Y an d R E A V L E Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. * P E R C U R I A M:2

P a tr ic k K n ig h to n ap p e a ls h is c o n v ic tio n s f o rb a n k r o b b e ry a n d c o n s p ir a c y to c om m i tba nk r obbe ry a nd hi s s e nt e nc e s . K ni ght on c ha l l e nge s the s uf f i c i e nc y of th e e v id e n c e a s to o n e c o u n t o f th e in d ic tm e n t, a n e v id e n tia ry ru lin g , ar e f u s a l to g iv e aju ry in s tru c tio n , a n d th r e e d e c is io n s r e la te d to s e n te n c in g . W e a f f irm . I . B AC KG RO UN D I n 2003, K ni ght on w a s a rr e s t e d a nd i ndi c t e d on c ha r ge s a r i s i ng f r om ba nk r obbe r i e s c om m i tt e d i n G r e e na c r e s , R i vi e r aB e a c h, a nd B oy nt on B e a c h, F l or i da on N o v e m b e r1 9 , 2 0 0 2 , D e c e m b e r1 3 , 2 0 0 2 , D e c e m b e r3 1 , 2 0 0 2 , a n d J u n e 1 9 , 2 0 0 3 . K n ig h to n p le a d e d n o t g u ilty a n d p r o c e e d e d to tr ia l. A s t o the c ounttha tK ni ght on c ha l l e nge s r e ga r di ng s uf f i c i e nc y , the gove rnm e ntpr e s e nt e d e vi de nc e tha ton J une 19, 2003, P e t e rB ue z a , a ba nk em pl oyee for B ank o f A m er i ca , op ened the dri ve-i n t el l erbu i l di ng and w as w a lk in g to th e m a in b a n k w h e n h e w a s a tta c k e d b y a m a n in a z ip - u p g a r a g e s u it w ith ato w e l o v e rh is f

a c e . T h e p e rp e tr a to rth r e a te n e d B u e z aa n d d r a g g e d h im b a c k t o th e d r i v e - i n t e l l e rb u i l d i n g wh e r e a n o th e rm a n j o i n e d h i m . T h e two ro b b ers th en st o l e ap p ro x i m at el y $ 2 2 , 0 0 0 . B u eza rep o rt ed th atth e m an w h o fi rst att ac ked h i m w as approx i m at el y 5' 10 " t o 5 ' 11 " i n h ei gh tand w ei gh ed appr oxi m a t e l y 170 t o 180 pounds . B oth pe rpe tr a t or s punc he d B ue z ai n the f a c e or j a w , a nd B ue z as uf

f e r e d af r a c tur e d j a w . D ur i ng the r obbe ry , B ue z ahe a r d abe e p,3

lik e th e s o u n d f

r o m a N e x te l p h o n e . B u e z aa ls o a c tiv a te d th e s ile n t a la rm . F B I A g e n t R u iz d e G a m b o ar e s p o n d e d to th e a la rm a n d r e c o v e r e d a c e ll phone i n the a r e aof

the a s s a ul t . N o f

i nge rpr i nt s w e r e r e c ove r e d, butthe c e l l phone w a s r e g is te r e d to K n ig h to n . I n a d d itio n , atw o - d o o r , w h ite T o y o taC a m ry w ith gol d r i m s , s i m i l a rt o ac a rtha tK ni ght on dr ove , w a s obs e rve d ne a rthe s c e ne of the r o b b e ry . A s partof i t s c as e i n chi ef , the go vernm ental so pres ent ed evi dence, un der F e d e r a l R u le o f

E v id e n c e 4 0 4 ( b ) , o f

a d m is s io n s m a d e b y K n ig h to n to c oc ons pi r a t or s r e ga r di ng a n e a r l i e rr obbe ry of a W a c hovi aba nk on M a r c h 12, 2002, f orw hi c h K ni ght on w a s notc ha r ge d. T e r e s aH e l l e r , a W a c hovi at e l l e rw ho w a s p r e s e n t d u r in g th e r o b b e ry , te s tif ie d to th e f

a c t a n d m a n n e ro f

th e r o b b e ry . I n hi s de f

e ns e , K ni ght on pr e s e nt e d the t e s t i m oni e s of tw o of hi s gi r l f r i e nds thathe had l osthi s c el l ph on e bef ore the dat e of the robb ery a nd thathe w as i n b ed w i th one of

the w om e n dur i ng the r obbe ry . K ni ght on a l s o pr e s e nt e d the t e s t i m ony of a nothe rgi r l f

r i e nd tha t , a l though s he ow ne d aw hi t e ve hi c l e s i m i l a rt o the one seen atth e ro b b ery an d K n i g h t o n u sed th e car o n o ccasi o n , h e d i d n o th av e access to th e v e h ic le w h e n th e r o b b e ry o c c u rr e d . A tthe c l os e of

the e vi de nc e , K ni ght on r e que s t e d tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tgi ve th e f o llo w in g ju ry in s tru c tio n o n th e r e a s o n ab le d o u b t s ta n d a r d :4

I f th e e v id e n c e g iv e s e q u a l o rn e a r ly e q u a l c ir c u m s ta n tia l s u p p o r t to c om pe t i ng e xpl a na t i ons f ora n e l e m e ntof

a c ha r ge , one c ons i s t e nt w ith th e G o v e rn m e n t's th e o ry o f g u ilt, b u t th e o th e ra n e q u a lly pl ausi bl e i nn ocentre as on for the sa m e f ac t s a s off

er ed by the defense , th e n y o u m u s t n e c e s s a r ily e n te r ta in a r e a s o n ab le d o u b t a s to th e tru th of a n e l e m e ntof

the c ha r ge , a nd the r e f

or e , f i nd the de f

e nda ntnot g u i l ty. T h e g o v e rn m e n t o b

je c te d , a n d th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d e c lin e dto g iv e th e in s tru c tio n . K ni gh t on w as conv i ct ed on al l se ven cou nt s. A tse nt enci ng , the di stri ctcourt se nt ence d K ni gh t on t o 3 60 m on ths of i m pri sonm entw i th three ye ar s of s up ervi se d r e l e a s e . K ni ght on w a s or de r e d t o pa y a s pe c i a l a s s e s s m e ntof $700 a nd r e s t i tut i on in th e a m o u n t o f

$ 7 8 ,9 5 0 .4 2 . I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW T hi s appe a l i nvol ve s m ul t i pl e s t a nda r ds of r e vi e w . W he the rs uf

f i c i e nt e vi de nc e w a s pr e s e nt e d a ttr i a l t o s uppor tK ni ght on’ s c onvi c t i on i s a que s t i on of la w s u b je c t to d e n o v o r e v ie w . U n ite d S ta te s v . D ia z , 2 4 8 F .3 d 1 0 6 5 , 1 0 8 4 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2001) . “ T he e vi de nc e i s vi e w e d i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the gove rnm e nt an d all rea so n ab le in fe re n ce s a n d cr ed ib il ity c h o ices ar e m ad e in th e g o v er n m en t’ s f a vor . ” I d. “ W e r e vi e w the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s de c i s i ons on the a dm i s s i bi l i ty of evi dence of uncharged m i sc on du ctun der R ul e 404 (b) f or abuse of di sc re t i on . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. G i or da no, 261 F . 3d 1134, 1140 ( 11th C i r . 2001) . “ W e r e vi e w the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s f

a i l ur e t o pr ovi de a ddi t i ona l j ury i ns truc t i ons f orabus e of5

di s c r e t i on. ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M i l e s , 290 F . 3d 1341, 1354 ( 11th C i r . 2002) . T he C our tr e vi e w s que s t i ons of l a w a r i s i ng unde rthe S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s de novo a nd f i ndi ngs of

f a c tf orc l e a re rr or . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C r a w f or d, 407 F . 3d 1174, 1 1 7 7 - 7 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . I V . DI S CUS S I ON K ni ght on r a i s e s s i x a r gum e nt s on appe a l . F i r s t , K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe e v id e n c e is n o t s u f

f ic ie n t to s u p p o r t h is c o n v ic tio n f o rth e J u n e 1 9 , 2 0 0 3 , r o b b e ry . S e c o n d , K n ig h to n a r g u e s th a t it w a s a n ab u s e o f d is c r e tio n f

o rth e d is tr ic t c o u r t to al l ow the R ul e 404 (b) t es t i m on y of T er es a H el l erre gardi ng the un char ged rob bery o f th e W a c h o v iab a n k . T h ir d , K n ig h to n a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t ab u s e d its di s c r e t i on w he n i tr e f

us e d t o gi ve hi s pr opos e d j ury i ns truc t i on. F our th, K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our ti m pr ope r l y c a l c ul a t e d hi s s e nt e nc i ng r a nge . F i f th, K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr one ous l y c a l c ul a t e d the a m ountof the l os s . S i xth, K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr one ous l y de ni e d hi m the r i ght t o c onf r ontw i tne s s e s a tthe s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng. W e a ddr e s s e a c h a r gum e nti n turn. A . T h e E v ide n c e I

s Su ffic ie n t to Su

p p o r t th e V

e r d ic t. K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe e vi de nc e w a s nots uf f i c i e ntt o s us t a i n ac onvi c t i on f orthe J une 19, 2003, r obbe ry be c a us e the e vi de nc e e s t abl i s he d onl y tha t“ the robb ery w as com m i tt ed by an i nd i vi du al w ho i s t al l erand thi nn erthan M r.6

K ni gh t on . A nd , thata w hi t e C am ryw hi ch i s s i m i l art o the on e dri ven b y M r. K ni gh t on ’ s gi rl fr i end m ayhave been spot t ed atthe robb ery. ” K ni gh t on ar gu es that th e d i sco v ery o f h i s cel l p h o n e atth e scen e o f th e ro b b ery i s i m m at eri al b ecau se on e w i tness t es t i fi ed that , before the robb ery, K ni gh t on t ol d h erhi s c el l ph on e had b een l o sto r st o l en , an d an o th er w i tn ess t est i fi ed th at , atth e t i m e o f th e ro b b ery, K ni gh t on w as i n b ed as l ee p w i th h er . T h e s e a r g u m e n ts f a il. T he e vi de nc e e s t abl i s he d tha ta c e l l phone r e gi s t e r e d t o K ni ght on w a s f ound atthe cr i m e s ce ne and thata vehi cl e s i m i l art o a vehi cl e r egi st er ed t o K ni gh t on w as s e e n a torf

l e e i ng the c r i m e s c e ne . E vi de nc e w a s a l s o pr e s e nt e d tha tthe perpetra t ors use d a tw o-w aycom m un i ca t i on devi ce du ri ng the robb ery, w hi ch w as th e s a m e m a n n e ro f

c o m m u n ic a tio n u s e d b y K n ig h to n d u r in g th e o th e rr o b b e r ie s . T he j ury w a s e nt i t l e d t o di s be l i e ve both the e vi de nc e pr e s e nt e d by K ni ght on tha the h a d lo s t h is c e ll p h o n e a n d th e te s tim o n y o f K n ig h to n ’s g ir lf

r ie n d th a t h e w a s w ith h e rd u r in g th e r o b b e ry .

B . T he 404( b) E v i de nc e w as P r ope r l y A dm i t te d. K ni ght on ne xta r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d w he n i ta dm i tt e d the t e s t i m ony of

T e r e s aH e l l e rr e ga r di ng a n unc ha r ge d r obbe ry of a W a c hovi aB a nk f ortw o r e a s ons . K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe gove rnm e ntga ve i ns uf f i c i e ntnot i c e of i t s i nt entt o o ff

erthe evi dence and thatthe prob at i ve val ue of the evi dence w as7

o u tw e ig h e d b y its u n d u e p r e ju d ic e . T h e s e a r g u m e n ts f a il. W hen the go vernm enti nt ends t o i ntrodu ce R ul e 404 (b) e vi dence, that e vi de nc e i s a dm i s s i bl e f orl i m i t e d purpos e s “ pr ovi de d tha tupon r e que s tby the a c c u s e d , th e p r o s e c u tio n in a c r im in a l c a s e s h a ll p r o v id e r e a s o n ab le n o tic e in a d v a n c e o f

tr ia l . . . o f

th e g e n e r a l n a tu r e o f

a n y s u c h e v id e n c e it in te n d s to i ntrodu ce attri al . ” F ed. R . E vi d. 40 4(b). T he no t i ce of the go vernm ent , prov i ded to K n ig h to n f

iv e m o n th s b e f

o r e tr ia l, s ta te d th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t in te n d e d to i ntrodu ce “ evi dence and t es t i m on y” w i th res pectt o “ S t at em ent s by K ni gh t on that he robb ed the W ac ho vi a B ank . . . at37 00 B roadw ay , R i vi er a B ea ch, F l ori da. ” T he no t i ce of the go vernm enti nform ed K ni gh t on of i t s i nt entt o o ff erevi dence reg ard i n g th e W ach o v i a B an k ro b b ery an d g av e a d escri p t i o n o f th e ro b b ery, i nc l udi ng the a m ountof m one y s t ol e n. T hi s not i c e w a s a de qua t e tha tthe t e s t i m ony of H el l erm i gh tbe pres ent ed. R ul e 404 (b) r equi re s not i ce of the “ general nature” o f th e e v id e n c e , n o t ap r o f f e ro f w h a t w ill b e p r e s e n te d a tr ia l. T he t es t i m on y of H el l er , w hi ch desc ri bed the W ac ho vi a B ank rob bery , w as pr ope r l y a dm i tt e d a s r e l e va nta nd notundul y pr e j udi c i a l . T w o c oc ons pi r a t or s of K ni ght on’ s t e s t i f

i e d tha tK ni ght on ha d a dm i tt e d t o the m tha the r obbe d the W a c h o v iaB a n k . B e c a u s e K n ig h to n r o b b e d th e s a m e b a n k s e v e r a l m o n th s la te r , a c r i m e f orw hi c h he w a s be i ng tr i e d, the t e s t i m ony of H e l l e rr e ga r di ng the8

c om m i s s i on of

the e a r l i e rr obbe ry w a s pr oba t i ve of K ni ght on’ s know l e dge of the ba nk, hi s i nt e ntt o r ob the ba nk, a nd hi s m odus ope r a ndi w he n r obbi ng ba nks . T he d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in a d m ittin g th is e v id e n c e . C . T he D is tr i c t

C our t C or r e c t l y R e f us e d to G i v e the R e que s te d I ns tr uc t i on. K ni gh t on ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourterroneou sl y r ef used t o g i ve the j ury i nstruct i on thatK ni gh t on re qu es t ed. T hi s a rgum entfa i l s. “ W e w i l l re vers e atri al j ud ge’ s r ef

usal of a r equest ed i nstruct i on on l y i f the re j ec t ed i nstruct i on w as s ubs t a nt i ve l y c orr e c t ; the a c tua l c ha r ge t o the j ury di d nots ubs t a nt i a l l y c ove rthe pr opos e d i ns truc t i on, a nd the f a i l ur e t o gi ve i ts ubs t a nt i a l l y i m pa i r e d the de f e nda nt ’ s abi l i ty t o pr e s e nta n e f f e c t i ve de f

e ns e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. O rr , 825 F . 2d 1 5 3 7 , 1 5 4 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 7 ) . K n i g h t o n ’ s p ro p o sed j u ry i n stru ct i o n w as ak i n t o a “ reaso n ab l e h yp o th esi s” i ns truc t i on, ora n i ns truc t i on on the pr opos i t i on tha tthe pr oof m us tbe “ i nc ons i s t e nt w i th e ve ry r e a s onabl e hy pothe s i s of i nnoc e nc e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. J ohns on, 713 F . 2d 63 3, 65 3 (11 th C i r. 19 83 ). T he i nstruct i on w as confusi ng and u nn ec es sa ry w he n the j ury , a s he r e , w a s pr ope r l y i ns truc t e d r e ga r di ng r e a s onabl e doubt . S e e i d. ( quot i ng U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S t oke s , 471 F . 2d 1318, 1321 ( 5th C i r . 1973) ( c i t i ng H ol l a nd v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 348 U . S . 121, 137, 75 S . C t . 127, 140 ( 1954) ) ) . T he d istrict co u rt d idn o t ab u se it s d iscr etio n w h en itre fu se d to g iv e K n ig h to n ’s9

pr opos e d i ns truc t i on.

D . T he Se nte nc i ng R ange W as P r ope r l

y C alc ulate d. K n i g h t o n arg u es th ath i s sen t en ce v i o l at ed B l ak el y an d A p p ren d i b ecau se th e d is tr ic t c o u r t im p o s e d e n h a n c e m e n ts th a t w e r e n o t f o u n d b y a ju ry . T h is ar gu m enti s f

ri vo l ou s. T he di stri ctcourtun ders t oo d thatthe gu i del i nes w er e a d v is o ry . S e e U n ite d S ta te s v . B o o k e r , 5 4 3 U .S . 2 2 0 , 1 2 5 S . C t. 7 3 8 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . T h e r e w a s n o e rr o r .

E . T h e D istri ct

C o u rt C o rrect l y C a lcu la ted

th e L o ss. K ni ght on c om pl a i ns tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tdi d notpr ope r l y de t e rm i ne the a m ountof

the l os s a nd the r e s t i tut i on ow e d. K ni ght on a r gue s tha tthe a m ountof r e s t i tut i on w a s ba s e d on the pr e - s e nt e nc e i nve s t i ga t i on r e por tonl y a nd tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr one ous l y f a i l e d t o hol d ahe a r i ng a s r e qui r e d by s e c t i on 3664( d) ( 5) o f T itle 1 8 . T h e s e a r g u m e n ts f a il. B ec ause K ni gh t on fa i l ed t o o bj ec tt o the ca l cul at i on s i n the pre-s ent ence in v e s tig a tio n r e p o r t, th e d is tr ic t c o u r t w a s e n title d to r e ly o n th e u n d is p u te d f a c ts in the r e por t . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. H e dge s , 175 F . 3d 1312, 1315 ( 11th C i r . 1999) (“ H edges di d n otob

j ec tt o the st at em ent s i n the P S I on w hi ch the di stri ctcourt r e lie d . T h u s , th e s e s ta te m e n ts w e r e u n d is p u te d , a n d th e c o u r t w a s p e rm itte d to r e ly o n th e m d e s p ite th e ab s e n c e o f s u p p o r tin g e v id e n c e .” ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t c o rr e c tly10

cal cu l at ed th e l o ss b ased o n th atrep o rt . In ad d i t i o n , sect i o n 3 6 6 4 (d )(5 ) req u i res a h eari n g “ [i ] f th e v i ct i m ’ s l o sses are n o tascert ai n ab l e b y th e d at e th ati s 1 0 d ays pri or t o sent enci ng . ” 18 U . S . C . § 3 66 4(d)(5). T he di stri ctcourtw as no tre qu i re d t o hol d ahe a r i ng be c a us e the l os s e s w e r e a s c e r t a i nabl e a nd l i s t e d i n the p r e - s e n te n c e r e p o r t b e f

o r e th e h e a r in g . F. Kni ghton D i d not

H av e a R i ght to C onf r ont W i tne s s e s at

Se nte nc i ng. F i na l l y , K ni ght on a s s e r t s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tvi ol a t e d hi s r i ghtt o c onf r ont the w i tne s s e s a ga i ns thi m a ts e nt e nc i ng. T hi s a r gum e nti s f or e c l os e d by our pr e c e de nt . “ T he r i ghtt o c onf r ont a t i on i s nota s e nt e nc i ng r i ght . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a n te lla n o , 4 3 0 F .3 d 1 1 4 2 , 1 1 4 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . I V . CONCL US I ON K ni gh t on ’ s c on vi ct i on s a nd se nt ence s a re AF F I RME D.