Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. AARON FOSTER, ET AL. : : : CRIMINAL NO. CCB-02-0410 : : ...o0o...

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Counsel for Michael Taylor has filed a post-verdict motion for judgment of acquittal on the McManus murder pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 29(c), and in the alternative requested the jury be allowed to consider residual doubt as a mitigating factor. (Docket No. 362.) The motion for judgment of acquittal is Denied. Briefly summarizing, the government presented very strong evidence of motive arising from Mr. Moses's requests that Mr. Taylor eliminate Mr. McManus as a witness, as well as Mr. Taylor's own involvement in the Spain and Harris murders. Aaron Butler's testimony provided evidence of Mr. Taylor's access to a weapon and his intent to shoot Mr. McManus. The eyewitness's description of the relative heights of Mr. McManus and the shooter was consistent with Mr. Taylor being the gunman, and a reasonable jury could have interpreted Mr. Taylor's later recorded statement to Mr. Butler as an admission. Further, the likelihood of Mr. Harris or an associate being the shooter was diminished by the fact, among others, that Mr. McManus's money was not taken from him when he was shot. Denial of the Rule 29 motion, however, does not mean that a juror should not consider any lingering doubt he or she may have concerning Mr. Taylor's responsibility for the murder of Mr. McManus. The court agrees with the analysis in United States v. Davis, 132 F. Supp. 2d 455 (E.D. La. 2001). While the Constitution does not require that the jury be permitted to consider residual

doubt as a mitigating factor, see Franklin v. Lynaugh, 108 S. Ct. 2320, 2327 (1988),

neither does the Constitution forbid such consideration. Further, even if residual doubt is not considered to fall within the traditional definition of a mitigating factor, see id. at 2327; cf. Davis, 132 F. Supp. 2d at 458, 464 n.1, the statutory list of factors in 18 U.S.C.

Download USA v. Aaron Foster, et al..pdf

Maryland Law