Evidence of Uncharged Threat, Anonymous Jury, Did Not Require Reversal of Threat Convictions

US v. Beeman: Beeman was convicted of making interstate threats. After his guilty plea, he sent more threatening letters, this time to the AUSA and NCIS agent who worked on his case. For that he was charged with three counts of threatening federal officials. He went to trial, where the Government was allowed to introduce evidence of a fourth, uncharged, threatening letter (to the NCIS agent) and was convicted on all counts by an anonymous jury.

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed Beeman’s convictions. First, it rejected his argument that the uncharged fourth letter should have been excluded. Finding no abuse of discretion on the district court’s part, the court concluded that the letter was admissible as res gestae for the charged offenses (it helped “complete the story” of those offenses) or under Rule 404(b) and was not unduly prejudicial. Second, it concluded there was no abuse of discretion in using an anonymous jury (assuming it actually was – defense counsel had the names, but Beeman didn’t), noting Beeman’s history of interfering with judicial proceedings. Finally, the court held there was no abuse of discretion in denying Beeman a mistrial during closing argument when the Government improperly stated the legal standard, noting that it was brief and corrected by the district court.