U.S. v. Clemons 32 F. 3D 1504 11th Cir 1994

U.S. v. Clemons

United States of America

Eugene Milton Clemons, Dedrick Germond Smith

93-6328, 1994

Parties: United States of America, (Plaintiff-Appellee); Eugene Milton Clemons, II, Dedrick Germond Smith, (Defendants-Appellants)

Facts: On the evening of Thursday, May 28, 1992 there were two convergent events that occurred at a Birmingham, Alabama Chevron Station. 1) George Althouse, Mark Hobbes and Naylor Braswell, all law enforcement personnel, planned to meet to discuss the next day's activities. Naylor was Althouse's roommate, and they stopped at a Chevron Station on route. They were driving Braswell's undercover auto, a black Chevrolet Camaro, Z-28; 2) Dedrick Smith, Eugene Clemons and Kenny Reed were out canvassing shopping centers looking for a Z-28 to use for engine parts. Smith, et al. spotted Braswell's Z-28 and Clemons, carrying a weapon, exited the car and headed toward the Camaro.

Braswell was not in the vehicle, having left to find a Payphone. While inside the Chevron, Braswell saw someone sitting in the car with Althouse, ostensibly pointing a gun at his head. Seconds later, Braswell heard several gunshots and saw Althouse leave the car and shoot at the Camaro. Althouse died from gunshot wounds.

Smith and Reed had already left the Chevron parking lot to wait for Clemons. They heard several gunshots and saw Clemons leave the scene in the Camaro, driving quite fast. Clemons drove to a friend's home, Herman Shannon. However, once Shannon and Clemons began looking through the car, they realized it was likely a law enforcement vehicle. Clemons and Smith left town; Clemons was found and arrested on June 6, 1992 in Cleveland, Ohio; and Smith was arrested in Birmingham several days later. In a Jury Trial, both were convicted of the murder of Althouse.

Prior Proceedings: District Court, Jury Trial in Birmingham, Alabama resulting in conviction of Smith and Clemons.

Issues Presented/Questions of Law: Sections 1111 and 1112 of 18. USC Sec. 1114 regarding anyone who kills or attempts to kill an officer or employee of the Secret Service or DEA.

Arguments of Objectives of the Parties: Clemons appealed the verdict on three counts: 1) evidence was not convincingly offered at trial that Althouse was a law enforcement officer engaged in professional duties; 2) the Court abused its power in allowing evidence prior actions by Clemons; 3) the Court abused its power by allowing a waiver and confession given by Clemons in connection with a prior issue. Smith contended that the Court was in error by allowing the Government to impeach Clemons' confession that implicated Smith.

The Government argues that Clemons and Smith were correctly convicted in violation of 18 USC Secs. 111 and 1114, and Clemons of 18 USC Sec. 924 (c) which deals with penalties applied to individuals who specifically harm a federal agent.

Holding/Rule of Law: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed both convictions.

Rationale: There were three points to Clemons' appeal:

1. The Court concluded that there is no specific test to determine when a federal agent is, or is not, on duty. Citing previous cases (U.S. v Hoffer and U.S. v Boone), the Court held that particularly an undercover officer may be performing duties outside of the scope of an 8-5 job, not wearing a uniform, or engaging in phone calls, etc. It was not incumbent on Althouse to identify himself as a federal agent.

2. Clemons asserted that the Court erred when admitting evidence. Using U.S. v Beechum and U.S. v. Cardenas, the Court disagreed with Clemons and found that the similarities in crimes allowed additional evidence to be admitted.