Gant
United States v. Gant
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Ronnie Gant (“Gant”) appeals from his convictions of (1) conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(l)(B)(vii), and 846; and (2) possession with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 841(b)(l)(B)(vii). The facts are known to the parties and need not be repeated here.
1. The district court did not err in excluding two defense rebuttal witnesses as a sanction for Gant’s violation of a disclosure agreement. See Taylor v. Illinois, 484 U.S. 400, 414-15 , 108 S.Ct. 646 , 98 L.Ed.2d 798 (1988). Gant has failed to show that the rebuttal witnesses’ testimony would not be cumulative of evidence presented at trial. There was no plain error.
2. After conducting an in camera inspection of Agent Dreeland’s notes, we find that the district court did not clearly err by declining to order Agent Dreeland’s notes be disclosed under Brady.
3. A “mere presence” jury instruction was unnecessary because the government’s case rested on more than just the defendant’s presence alone and the jury was properly…