Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
No. 14-4594
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Liam OGrady, District
Judge. (1:14-cr-00015-LO-2)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Ray Allen Dicks, Jr., was convicted by a jury of conspiracy
to commit Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. 1951(a) (2012), and
sentenced to 144 months imprisonment.
trial
judge
closing arguments.
improperly
interrupted
his
attorney
during
On
robbery, a customer who had been in the store the day before the
robbery
contacted
police.
The
customer
testified
that
he
According to
The customer
noticed that one of the men was standing behind him in the
checkout line with only a few smallish items to buy which were
the sort of things that you might get at a corner drug store.
They didnt seem to be the kind of things that you would make a
special
trip
to
supermarket
2
to
buy.
Based
on
these
Store records
also confirmed that the purchase was made using Dicks Safeway
Club card.
Louis Jackson testified that he, along with Dicks, Artemis
Riley,
and
Calvin
Lewis
(Dicks
cousin),
decided
to
rob
the
to
Safeway,
parked
outside
the
store,
and
donned
customers using a gun that Jackson had taken from the customer.
Having heard the gunshot, Riley drove away, leaving the others
to flee on foot.
Riley also testified that he, along with Dicks, Lewis, and
Jackson, planned to rob the Safeway store and that they had gone
to look at it the day before the robbery.
According to
Riley, after the group visited the store, they decided it was
an easy robbery.
After Lewis was arrested, he made a call to his girlfriend
that
was
recorded
and
played
for
the
jury.
During
the
Who,
Ray?
to
which
Lewis
replied,
yeah.
She
A
Thats
improper
argument.
Disregard
[Counsel:]
I would tell you, Judge - - Im sorry, I
would tell you that the reason is that the physical
evidence is not sufficient to prove Mr. Dicks beyond a
reasonable doubt. Three men went into a Safeway store
on November 17.
The Court:
You will disregard that last statement
as well.
Counsel, theres no evidence of why other
individuals entered into those plea agreements.
Its
pure speculation on his behalf, and hes got no basis
for making that statement.
Dicks counsel did not object.
sufficiency
of
the
evidence
faces
heavy
burden.
United
States v. McLean, 715 F.3d 129, 137 (4th Cir. 2013) (internal
quotation marks omitted).
substantial
conviction.
evidence
Glasser
v.
in
the
United
record
States,
to
315
support
U.S.
60,
the
80
Substantial
of
fact
evidence
could
accept
is
as
evidence
that
adequate
and
reasonable
sufficient
to
alteration
omitted).
Reversal
for
insufficient
evidence
is
of
the
evidence,
this
Court
In evaluating the
does
not
review
the
contradictions
Government.
in
the
testimony
in
favor
of
the
2007).
To
prove
robbery
in
violation
of
the
Hobbs
Act,
the
United
States
v.
Reed,
780
F.3d
260,
271
(4th
Cir.
2015)
and
Jackson,
both
of
whom
confessed
to
the
robbery.
the
jurys
verdict
because
[t]here
was
no
evidence
First,
of
province
determinations
of
the
jury
and
credibility
are
6
not
are
within
susceptible
to
the
sole
judicial
review.
Burgos,
omitted).
to
sustain
94
F.3d
conviction,
at
863
even
(internal
though
quotation
uncorroborated,
marks
if
it
to
sustain
its
burden
of
proof
for
the
conspiracy
conviction.
Next,
Dicks
argues
that
the
district
court
judges
(4th
Cir.
(failure
to
object
limits
review
of
To
412
(4th
Cir.),
denied,
134
S.
Ct.
421
(2013)
We find no
the
presentations
of
misunderstandings,
and
counsel
must
in
order
manage
to
litigation
clarify
to
avoid
323, 332 (4th Cir. 2006) (citations and internal quotation marks
omitted).
In
claims,
[this
comments
were
opportunity
the
specific
court]
so
for
may
context
not
prejudicial
fair
and
of
judicial
intervene
as
to
unless
deny
impartial
the
intervention
the
judges
defendant[]
trial.
Id.
an
(internal
appears
to
argue
that
the
district
court
judge
sentencing
benefits
each
received
as
result
of
their
trial
argument
when
record,
an
judges
counsel
interruption
suggests,
inappropriate
without
motive
8
during
on
counsels
any
support
the
part
closing
in
of
the
the
Government.
335 (4th Cir. 2003) (Because counsel for [the defendant] was
suggesting in this statement to the jury some impropriety by the
United
States,
court,
the
position
district
court
that
counsel
never
appropriately
established
concluded
that
in
the
argument that counsel was making had limited value and may have
been unfair.).
did
interrupting
not
err
by
Dicks
attorney
during
closing
argument.
Therefore, we affirm the district courts judgment.
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
We
legal
AFFIRMED