Opinion ID: 3049294
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Current Crime

Text: At 3:00 a.m. on May 9, 2011, Deputy Jeremy Eckdahl of the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office (“ACSO”) stopped Scanes, who was driving a car that appeared to be in violation of state window-tint laws. Scanes had two passengers in his car. After noticing one of the passengers was sweating and shaking, Deputy Eckdahl requested backup. After a second officer arrived with a canine, Scanes appeared extremely nervous. Scanes was sweating, his hands were shaking, his mouth was dry, and his carotid artery was noticeably beating quickly. After the canine alerted to Scanes’s car, officers found a black bag containing a DVD player and some clothes in the trunk of the car. A heat-sealed bag with 996.4 grams of cocaine and a package containing approximately 45 grams of Oxycodone were 2 Case: 13-11361 Date Filed: 07/24/2014 Page: 3 of 12 found inside the DVD player. Both packages were wrapped in duct tape. Scanes’s fingerprint was found on the tape on one of the packages. Scanes was indicted and charged with possessing Oxycodone and 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and (b)(1)(B)(ii). Prior to trial, Scanes filed a motion in limine to preclude the government from introducing evidence of his 2006 state conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine. The district judge denied the motion. The judge found (1) the prior conviction was relevant to Scanes’s intent in this case; (2) the factual differences between the prior case and this case were not material to Scanes’s intent; (3) the age of the prior conviction was not significant; and (4) the government had a strong need for the evidence. The case proceeded to a jury trial. The government called Officer Petroczky to testify regarding Scanes’s 2006 conviction. Officer Petroczky testified, prior to stopping Scanes, he had been looking for Scanes’s car, because he “had warrants out for his arrest.” ROA at 733. Following a defense objection, and in response to follow-up questions by the government, Officer Petroczky testified he had stopped Scanes because his license was suspended, and the tag light on his car was not operating. Scanes moved for a mistrial and argued the government had introduced evidence of his additional criminal conduct without prior notice. The district judge 3 Case: 13-11361 Date Filed: 07/24/2014 Page: 4 of 12 denied the motion but cautioned Officer Petroczky not to volunteer information about other matters. The judge also instructed the jury not to consider evidence of Scanes’s prior acts to decide if he committed the acts charged in the indictment. The judge explained the jury could consider that evidence for other limited purposes, which the judge would explain later in the proceedings. Following the judge’s limiting instruction, Officer Petroczky testified, after he had stopped Scanes in 2006, he found 21 grams of cocaine in the center console of the car. The district judge admitted the state judgment showing, in June 2006, Scanes had pled nolo contendere to possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine. The government also called ASCO Deputy Travis Devinny, who had assisted in Scanes’s post-arrest interview. He testified the retail value of 1 kilogram of cocaine in the area was approximately $32,000 to $33,000, and the retail value of Oxycodone was approximately $1 per milligram. Deputy Devinny further testified Scanes admitted owning the black bag found in the car he was driving in May 2011, as well as the clothes in the bag. Scanes’s brother, Terry Scanes, Jr., testified on Scanes’s behalf. Terry Scanes testified Scanes was unemployed in May 2011. He further testified his brother had borrowed his car on May 9, 2011, and several family members had access to the car. Before Scanes borrowed the car, it had been parked at the home of his father, who previously had been convicted of cocaine trafficking. Scanes 4 Case: 13-11361 Date Filed: 07/24/2014 Page: 5 of 12 testified he had never seen the DVD player or drug packages found in his brother’s car before his arrest, and he had used gray duct tape from his father’s home for various home and car repairs. Scanes also testified, at the time of his prior arrest and this arrest, he had been attending college, and, at the time of his Tallahassee arrest, he had been unemployed. During the government’s closing argument, the prosecutor asked the jury to consider the similarities between Scanes’s prior arrest and the one in this case. The district judge instructed the jury that statements by the lawyers were not evidence and not binding on the jury, and the jurors’ own recollection and interpretation of the evidence was controlling. The judge again instructed the jury not to consider evidence of prior acts by Scanes to decide if he had committed the acts charged in the indictment. In contrast, the judge explained the jury was permitted to consider evidence of similar acts committed on other occasions to decide whether Scanes had the state of mind or intent necessary for the crime charged or whether he had committed the charged acts by accident or mistake. The jury convicted Scanes. On appeal, Scanes argues the district judge abused his discretion by admitting into evidence his prior cocaine-possession conviction, under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). He also argues the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. 5 Case: 13-11361 Date Filed: 07/24/2014 Page: 6 of 12