Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
No. 05-4459
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CR04-131-RDB)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
For his part in the 2003 carjacking, abduction, robbery, and
shooting of Edward Hawkins in Baltimore, Maryland, Jamaal Walker
was convicted of carjacking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2119,
using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c), and conspiring to use a firearm
during and in relation to a crime of violence, in violation of 18
U.S.C. 924(o).
I
Walker contends first that the district court abused its
discretion in admitting into evidence irrelevant and prejudicial
evidence in violation of Federal Rules of Evidence 403, 404(b), and
802.
-2-
testimony
that
Walker
stored
the
gun
that
was
used
in
the
Contrary to
that
conspiracy.
took
place
in
preparation
for
and
during
the
not
govern
testimony
probative
of
the
charged
conduct.
contained
statements
attributed
to
Walker.
Such
II
Walker next contends that the district court abused its
discretion in admitting evidence that he threatened co-conspirator
Cypress during the course of the trial.
-3-
III
Walker also contends that the district court abused its
discretion in failing to grant his motion for a mistrial or in
failing to give curative instructions with respect to two allegedly
improper remarks made by the prosecutor during closing arguments.
The first remark was made in response to Walkers counsels
statement during closing argument that the government had failed to
call certain friends and relatives of the co-conspirators to
corroborate the co-conspirators testimony.
In rebuttal, the
prosecutor responded that the defense also had the ability to call
the same witnesses but had chosen not to.
-4-
court
need
not
have
given
curative
instruction.
We
have
that
the
failure
to
call
witness
weakens
the
refuting
the
argument
that
the
failure
to
call
certain
the
governments
evidence.
See
United
States
v.
about
what
he
saw.
During
rebuttal,
the
prosecutor
inconsistencies
in
and
-5-
among
witnesses
After
testimony
IV
Finally, Walker contends that the district court clearly erred
in increasing his base offense level by four after finding that he
was an organizer or leader of the conspiracy, see U.S.S.G.
3B1.1(c),
and
after
U.S.S.G. 3C1.1.
finding
that
he
obstructed
justice,
see
-6-
him to help steal the car to be used in the robbery, and he asked
Ms. Poole to contact Hawkins to arrange the meeting.
Walker
the
carjacking.
Walker
drove
the
stolen
van
to
the
carjacking site and then led the group to the site of the shooting.
Walker gave orders to his co-conspirators, including ordering them
to get into Hawkins car after the shooting and ordering Cypress to
dispose of Hawkins car afterwards.
There was
thus ample evidence from which the district court could have
concluded that Walker was a leader or organizer of the conspiracy.
With
respect
to
the
district
courts
enhancement
for
conduct
to
which
the
adjustment
-7-
applies.
Two
witnesses
qualified
as
an
obstruction
of
justice
justifying
an
AFFIRMED.
-8-