United States v. Bobby Suggs, Seantai Suggs, Aaron M. Davis, Bobby Davis, and Benjamin Johnson

Citation: 374 F.3d 508Docket: 02-3903, 03-1091, 03-1425, 03-1517, 03-1899

Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; August 13, 2004; Federal Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

On July 20, 2001, a federal grand jury indicted eighteen defendants, including Bobby Suggs, Seantai Suggs, and Aaron Davis, on multiple drug-related charges, including conspiracy to possess and distribute over fifty grams of cocaine base (crack). The jury convicted these three defendants, who appealed their convictions, arguing the district court improperly admitted prejudicial evidence, including photographs of tattoos and a gold front tooth meant to suggest gang affiliation. Seantai Suggs and Aaron Davis also contested the sufficiency of the evidence for the conspiracy charge. The court affirmed their convictions.

Benjamin Johnson and Bobby Davis pled guilty to distributing cocaine base but sought to withdraw their pleas, despite having waived their right to appeal in their plea agreements. The court upheld the appeal waivers and sentences for both men.

The government aimed to establish that the defendants participated in a criminal conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine in Gary, Indiana, from 1994 to 2001. Bobby Suggs led the conspiracy, which involved obtaining and converting powder cocaine into crack, distributing it to associates, including his brother and Aaron Davis, who sold it to customers and other dealers. The prosecution's case relied on testimony from law enforcement, recorded drug transactions, phone calls, and evidence from Seantai's apartment. The government also attempted to link the defendants to the Concord Affiliated gang, associated with the Vice Lords, which the defendants denied, claiming CCA was merely a rap group.

Several witnesses provided evidence that Bobby was a significant recipient of cocaine during a conspiracy. Robert Evans, Bobby's supplier, testified to delivering multiple kilograms of powder cocaine to Bobby, including a one-kilogram delivery to his Concord apartment in 1997, where both Bobby and Seantai were present. After Robert went to jail, Anthony Evans and Tomas Unzueta confirmed Bobby's continued purchases of large cocaine quantities. Unzueta directly sold Bobby six kilograms after a dispute with Anthony. Bobby converted this cocaine into crack at various residences, including Seantai's. 

Stacey Brookshire, a drug dealer, witnessed Bobby cooking over half a kilogram in his apartment and assisted him with nine ounces at another location. Co-conspirator Previn Starns also testified about seeing Bobby cook crack. Several other drug dealers pleaded guilty and implicated Bobby, Seantai, and Aaron Davis in the conspiracy. Michael Carter testified that Bobby and Aaron supplied him with drugs and that Seantai urged him to misrepresent his involvement. 

Further evidence indicated that the conspiracy sold crack in Concord, with an FBI informant purchasing drugs in numerous transactions from various dealers. Although she didn’t buy from the three defendants, she noted that their presence enhanced the organization among other dealers. Controlled buys were also conducted by the FBI from Seantai and Aaron, with agents managing the transactions and recovering the purchased drugs.

Additionally, incriminating evidence was seized from local residences, including a search of Seantai's apartment where items indicative of drug preparation and packaging were found, such as a Pyrex beaker, baking soda, and a digital scale. Recorded jail calls revealed Seantai discussing a large amount of crack, referred to as the 'fat rock,' located at 'Ms. Howard's' house. A subsequent search of that residence uncovered a drug ledger accounting for a kilogram of drugs.

Defendants' statements and communications were pivotal in establishing their involvement in drug trafficking. Seantai, arrested shortly after a search, told FBI agents he needed a gun due to his connection with the CCA, stating, "CCA don't take shit from no one." The FBI intercepted calls involving Bobby, where he ordered members to "lay low" upon learning of police presence. Aaron Davis, a member of the CCA rap group, boasted about drug trade involvement in the song "COKE" and acknowledged the authenticity of his lyrics in a video titled "Live or Die in GI."

To substantiate the conspiracy, the government presented evidence of gang affiliation, highlighting Bobby's peace negotiation with the rival Bronx Boys gang and violent reprisals ordered against a citizen who reported drug activities. Testimony from cooperating witness Michael Carter identified Davis as a Vice Lord, supported by a letter found in his apartment referring to him as "Lord." Bobby stated he would align with the Vice Lords if imprisoned, and literature related to the gang was recovered from the homes of both Bobby and Seantai.

Gang evidence also included expert testimony regarding the Defendants' tattoos and gestures linked to the Vice Lords. Bobby has a tattoo of a cross labeled "Insane," while Seantai has a crescent moon and five-point star tattoo. Davis has a five-point star in a gold tooth cap. Photographs showed gang members using signs and wearing jewelry indicative of Vice Lord affiliation.

All three men were convicted of drug conspiracy and received severe sentences: Bobby and Seantai were sentenced to life in prison, while Davis received 405 months. They contested the gang evidence's admissibility and the sufficiency of evidence supporting their conspiracy convictions. Separately, Benjamin Johnson pleaded guilty to distributing crack to a confidential informant, as part of the same conspiracy.

On January 14, 2003, the district court conducted a change of plea hearing in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, during which Johnson expressed his intent to plead guilty to Count 7. The judge performed the required inquiries, and Johnson acknowledged understanding that dismissed counts could still influence his sentencing as relevant conduct under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. He also recognized the importance of his right to appeal but chose to waive it regarding his sentence. Following this, the court accepted Johnson's plea and adjudged him guilty.

Before sentencing, Johnson sought to withdraw his plea, claiming coercion and a lack of understanding about relevant conduct. The district judge evaluated his request under Rule 11(d)(2)(B) but determined it was not just or fair to allow withdrawal. At the sentencing hearing, the judge found that Johnson had been involved with over 1.5 kilograms of crack cocaine over five years and applied a two-level enhancement for weapon use, denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility. Johnson received a 240-month sentence, the maximum for his conviction. He later appealed, arguing for an evidentiary hearing on his plea withdrawal and a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

Separately, Bobby Davis pleaded guilty on May 1, 2002, to Count 10, acknowledging similar terms regarding his plea's voluntariness and the implications of dismissed counts before the court. At his sentencing on February 11, 2003, Davis was also found to have dealt over 1.5 kilograms of crack cocaine and received a two-level enhancement for weapon use, with no reduction for acceptance of responsibility. He was sentenced to 240 months, the maximum for his count, and sought to appeal his plea agreement's voluntariness, though his attorney indicated no non-frivolous issues for appeal under Anders v. California.

Bobby Suggs, Seantai Suggs, and Aaron Davis challenge the admission of gang affiliation evidence on three grounds. First, they argue that such evidence is not directly relevant to the drug distribution conspiracy charges and unfairly biases the jury against them based solely on gang membership, which is not a crime. Second, they claim specific exhibits, including tattoos and a gold tooth, are particularly prejudicial and lack sufficient probative value to connect them to the Vice Lords street gang. Third, they contend that the district judge failed to provide a limiting instruction regarding the gang affiliation evidence, despite not requesting one during the trial.

The legal standard for relevant evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 401 is that it must make a consequential fact more or less probable. However, under Rule 403, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the potential for unfair prejudice. Unfairly prejudicial evidence is defined as that which may lead the jury to make decisions based on emotion rather than the facts presented.

The court gives deference to a trial judge's evidentiary rulings due to their first-hand exposure to the case and their ability to assess the evidence's impact. Reversal of such rulings occurs only if the district court clearly abuses its discretion.

In the Seventh Circuit, evidence of gang affiliation is generally admissible when it is relevant to demonstrating a joint venture or conspiracy among its members, particularly in conspiracy cases where the relationships among individuals are central to the charges. Previous cases support the admissibility of gang evidence in establishing criminal intent or conspiracy agreements.

The district court properly admitted evidence of the Defendants' gang affiliation to demonstrate a conspiracy to distribute illegal drugs and the connections among members of the CCA gang. This evidence was not misleading to the jury, as it served as circumstantial support for the government's theory of a conspiracy involving crack distribution. The affiliation with the Vice Lords countered the defense's claim that CCA was merely a rap group, establishing that CCA was a gang involved in the local drug trade, which the court deemed significant.

The trial court also allowed the admission of tattoo evidence from Bobby and Seantai Suggs and Aaron Davis's gold tooth, ruling it did not violate Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Tattoos aiding in establishing gang membership are relevant to demonstrating a joint venture or conspiracy, unlike previous cases where tattoo evidence was deemed inappropriate due to lack of relevance to conspiracy charges. The trial judge exercised discretion appropriately, as the evidence linked drug distribution to CCA's gang affiliation, providing the jury with circumstantial support for the conspiracy claim.

Regarding the Defendants' complaint about the absence of a limiting instruction for the jury on gang-affiliation evidence, the court found no error. The Defendants failed to request such an instruction, thereby forfeiting their argument. The district court’s decision not to provide one sua sponte was not considered plain error, as the Defendants may have tactically chosen to avoid highlighting their gang membership. Thus, they cannot now contest the lack of a limiting instruction.

Seantai Suggs and Aaron Davis acknowledge their involvement as crack dealers but contest the existence of a conspiracy with Bobby Suggs and others, arguing instead for a mere buyer-seller relationship. The standard for their appeal regarding insufficient evidence is rigorous, as courts grant significant deference to jury verdicts. To establish a conspiracy under 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must demonstrate an agreement to possess and distribute crack, with both defendants knowingly and intentionally joining this agreement. This agreement must indicate more than individual drug sales, requiring evidence of a collective intent to engage in criminal activity.

To differentiate between a buyer-seller relationship and a conspiratorial agreement, factors such as prolonged cooperation, mutual trust, standardized dealings, credit sales, and the volume of drugs are considered. While not all factors are necessary, a combination indicating a shared interest beyond isolated transactions can support a finding of conspiracy. 

The evidence indicated a cooperative venture, with a long-term distribution network in Concord controlled by the CCA gang. Testimony revealed that Bobby Suggs procured large quantities of cocaine, converted it to crack, and distributed it while maintaining vigilance against law enforcement and engaging in violence to protect their operations. 

Further ties between Seantai Suggs and the conspiracy were evident. His residence was used for drug production, corroborated by witness testimony and physical evidence from an FBI search. Conversations between the Suggs brothers about drug locations and testimony regarding crack given to Seantai for resale solidified his involvement in the conspiracy.

Sufficient evidence linked Aaron Davis to a drug conspiracy, as he supplied various dealers, including William Carter, with drugs. Testimonies from Kenneth Lewis and Stacey Brookshire confirmed that Bobby Suggs provided crack to Aaron. Both Aaron and Seantai were involved in selling crack to FBI informants during controlled buys and had connections to CCA and the Vice Lords. The close collaboration between the Suggs brothers and Aaron indicated mutual trust and a shared intent, undermining claims of mere buyer-seller dynamics. The evidence presented at trial allowed a rational jury to find the defendants guilty of conspiring to distribute crack, and the jury's verdict will not be disturbed.

Regarding plea agreements, a defendant can waive appeal rights if the waiver is clear. Johnson, on appeal, contested the Sentencing Guidelines application and argued for an evidentiary hearing after attempting to withdraw his guilty plea, claiming coercion and lack of understanding. However, he waived the right to appeal his sentence in his plea agreement, and there was no evidence suggesting his guilty plea was not knowing or voluntary. The trial judge confirmed Johnson's understanding of the sentencing implications and his rights during the Rule 11 colloquy. Thus, Johnson cannot challenge the Sentencing Guidelines application.

The government conceded that the appellate waiver did not apply to the denial of an evidentiary hearing. Johnson's attempt to withdraw his plea was denied by the district judge, who found the Rule 11 colloquy determinative. The refusal for an evidentiary hearing is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and a hearing is warranted if substantial evidence is presented that questions the plea's validity. If no such evidence is offered or if the claims are deemed unreliable, the motion can be denied without a hearing. The defendant must overcome the presumption of truthfulness attached to the Rule 11 statements.

Johnson affirmed during his Rule 11 colloquy that he understood the implications of relevant conduct on his sentencing and confirmed discussions with his attorney regarding this matter. He denied any coercion to plead guilty from anyone other than his lawyer. His subsequent motion to withdraw the guilty plea contradicted his prior statements and lacked supporting evidence, leading the district judge to credit his Rule 11 testimony as definitive.

Davis, dissatisfied with his twenty-year plea bargain, appealed, seeking to challenge the validity of his appeal waiver or assert that his plea was not knowing and voluntary. His attorney requested to withdraw under Anders v. California, citing no non-frivolous issues for appeal. The trial judge had assured that Davis's plea was knowing and voluntary, confirming his understanding of relevant conduct and his rights to a fair trial.

The court declined to reconsider existing case law, upheld Davis's waiver of appeal rights, and deemed the issues raised as frivolous. The convictions of Bobby Suggs, Seantai Suggs, and Aaron Davis were affirmed, Johnson's sentence was upheld, and Davis's appeal was dismissed, with his counsel's motion to withdraw granted. Additionally, evidence was presented regarding the rap group CCA, highlighting its prominence and connections to gang-related activities.