United States v. Ray Owen Slaughter

Ray Owen Slaughter was convicted on two of three counts of distribution of a controlled substance (cocaine) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Slaughter appeals his convictions alleging outrageous governmental misconduct, the trial court’s failure to admit certain out-of-court statements of a witness who was unavailable at the time of trial and challenging the court's failure to give certain jury instructions on entrapment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse.

*693 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Slaughter began working as a polygraph examiner in 1973 in the office of the Clark County Public Defender in Las Vegas, Nevada. For several years, Slaughter worked as a contract employee for the county, and also conducted his own business simultaneously. While he worked as a polygraph examiner, Slaughter had occasion to review various polygraphs involving sensitive criminal investigations in the Clark County area. In 1977, another police polygrapher, Charles Lee, had concluded that former Judge Harry E. Claiborne “had told the truth” about allegations that Claiborne, pri- or to becoming a judge, had retained a private investigator for the purpose of illegally…

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I concur in part A of the majority disposition, but dissent from parts B and C. I would affirm the judgment of conviction.

I

We review the district court’s determination of admissibility under Fed.R.Evid. 804(b)(3) for abuse of discretion. United States v. Satterfield, 572 F.2d 687, 690 (9th Cir.) (Satterfield), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 840 , 99 S.Ct. 128 , 58 L.Ed.2d 138 (1978). The proponent of the statement, Slaughter, must establish three elements under Rule 804(b)(3): (1) that the declarant, Kenny, was unavailable; (2) that the statement so far tended to subject Kenny to criminal liability that a reasonable person would not make the statement unless it was true; and (3) that corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of Kenny’s statement. Id. at 691.

*701 I agree with the majority that the first Satterfield prong has been met: Kenny was not available. It is less clear that the statement meets the second prong of the Satterfield test, which requires the court to ask whether Kenny’s statement was sufficiently against her penal interest to deem it trustworthy. The drafters of Rule 804(b)(3) realized the risks…

concurring:

Since Samson and Delilah, sexual seduction has been a means of taking advantage of an enemy. It always involves conduct that exploits and degrades the person being used as the seducer, violates ordinary standards of sexual conduct, and necessarily implies treachery poisoning a peculiarly personal relationship. If the government were in the business of employing such means against Americans as a matter of course, I would not hesitate to condemn the government’s conduct as outrageous. Justice Brandéis, dissenting, has articulated the standard: the government is the universal teacher; it should not be the teacher of dirty tricks. Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 485 , 48 S.Ct. 564, 575 , 72 L.Ed. 944 (1928). The government may not be permitted by its courts to obtain criminal convictions by gross means. The war against drugs is not to be won by prostitution. In this case there is just a shadow of doubt as to what the government did, and I defer to the trial court's view that the defendant took the initiative. I would not give an imprimatur to the government’s conduct, and I believe it a very close question as to whether the prosecution should have been dismissed…

891 F.2d 691 29 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 465 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ray Owen SLAUGHTER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 88-1302. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 12, 1989. Decided Nov. 22, 1989. 1 Daniel Markoff, Federal Public Defender, and Randall J. Roske, Chief Asst. Federal Public Defender, Las Vegas, Nev., for defendant-appellant. 2 William A. Maddox, U.S. Atty., and Anne Kristina Perry, Asst. U.S. Atty., Las Vegas, Nev., for plaintiff-appellee. 3 Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. 4 Before WALLACE and NOONAN, Circuit Judges, and ZILLY, District Judge. * ZILLY, District Judge: 5 Ray Owen Slaughter was convicted on two of three counts of distribution of a controlled substance (cocaine) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Slaughter appeals his convictions alleging outrageous governmental misconduct, the trial court's failure to admit certain out-of-court statements of a witness who was unavailable at the time of trial and challenging the court's failure to give certain jury instructions on entrapment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse.FACTUAL AND…