United States v. Young, No. 12-2527 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendants Young and Mock were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire, resulting in death and murder-for-hire, resulting in death. The court rejected defendants' evidentiary challenges; the district court did not err in admitting statements from witnesses that Young and Mock solicited their help in finding someone to murder Young's husband; the admission of a deputy's testimony regarding Mock's alibi did not violate Young's confrontation rights; admission of a photocopied note was harmless; the district court did not adversely affect Mock's substantial rights by excluding testimony relating to Young's second account of events to a sheriff; the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants' motions to sever their trial; the district court did not clearly err in rejecting defendant's Batson challenge regarding Jurors 2, 12, 28, and 35; and the evidence was sufficient to prove that Young paid Mock consideration for her assistance in murdering Young's husband.
Court Description: Criminal Case - convictions. Consolidated appeals following joint trial for conspiracy to commit murder for hire, resulting in death and murder for hire. Convictions affirmed. District court did not err in admitting testimony of witnesses over Rule 404(b) objections that demonstrated intent, motive, knowledge, and plan, and provided intrinsic evidence of Young's offense. Evidence of a conspiracy was sufficient to allow for admission of coconspirator statements against Young. Admission of Mock's statement did not violate Young's confrontation clause rights because testimony not admitted for truth of matter asserted. District court did not abuse its discretion in admitting unauthenticated note and it was otherwise harmless error. The district court's exclusion of evidence of Young's second conflicting account was not preserved for appeal and did not constitute plain error. The district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to sever the trials: Young has not shown prejudice by admission of note; antagonistic defenses are not prejudicial per se; testimony introduced against Young did not prejudice Mock to warrant severance. District court did not clearly err in rejecting Batson challenges to strikes of four African Americans. District court did not err in denying motion for judgment as a matter of law for failure to establish that either party received valuable consideration for commission of the offense, as there was significant circumstantial evidence to support verdict that Young promised to pay Mock money in consideration for commission of murder. Judge Kelly concurs.
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.