Jury Selection-Sentencing

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Derrick Granger

Case No.: 21-2874

Officials: Easterbrook, Wood, and Lee, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Jury Selection-Sentencing

A jury convicted Derrick Granger, Clifford King, and Eric Walker of conspiring to distribute heroin and methamphetamine in and around Indianapolis, Indiana. The jury also convicted them of some firearms offenses. The judge sentenced Granger and King to 360 months’ imprisonment and Walker to 330 months. They present seven issues on appeal. Five of these do not require discussion.

Defendants’ principal argument is that the court should have struck Juror 70 for cause. Appellants asked the Seventh Circuit to discard the district judge’s conclusion and make an independent (“de novo”) decision about Juror 70’s suitability. Precedential decisions say, to the contrary, that deferential review is appropriate. A court of appeals could not do better than a district judge in evaluating whether a prospective juror not only promises to keep an open mind but also is likely to keep that promise.

The only other argument to be considered concerns the propriety of Walker’s sentence. Guideline 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) provides that, for jointly undertaken criminal activity, each participant is accountable for “all acts and omissions of others that were—(i) within the scope of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, (ii) in furtherance of that criminal activity, and (iii) reasonably foreseeable in connection with that criminal activity”. The district judge made findings (i) and (ii) but not finding (iii). He did not address what conduct was “reasonably foreseeable” to Walker. That omission requires a remand for resentencing.

Affirmed, Vacated & Remanded.

Decided 06/09/23

Full Text