United States v. Davis, No. 16-3345 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress, motions in limine, motion for mistrial, motion for judgment of acquittal, and proposed buyer–seller instruction. The court held that the search warrant application supported a finding of probable cause where, considering the totality of the circumstances, the affidavits and application in support of the search warrant contained sufficient facts to establish a fair probability that evidence of criminal activity would be found in defendant's residence; the information contained in the warrant was not fatally stale; the district court did not err by admitting evidence of defendant's prior drug convictions; evidence of defendant's flight was probative of consciousness of guilt and was not unduly prejudicial; any error in declining to grant a mistrial based on a government witness's statements was harmless; the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine; and the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting the proposed buyer–seller instruction because the evidence established that defendant sold resale quantities of methamphetamine over an extended period of time.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Shepherd, Circuit Judge, and Fenner, District Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law. The warrant to search defendant's residence was supported by probable cause and the information contained in the application was not fatally stale; no error in denying defendant's motion in limine to exclude evidence of a prior conviction and his flight from the jurisdiction; by intentionally and voluntarily rejecting the court's suggested curative instruction which could have remedied much of any prejudice resulting from a government witness's testimony that defendant identified the source of his drugs in a post-Miranda statement and then withdrew his cooperation, defendant effectively waived his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion for a mistrial; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, and the district court did not err in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal; no error in denying defendant's request for a buyer-seller instruction as such an instruction was not supported by the trial evidence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.