U.S. v. Tinsley

In prosecution on armed bank robbery, drug distribution and firearm charges, defendant waived any appeal on Dist. Ct.’s denial of his motion to sever his robbery and drug offense charges, where defendant failed to renew his motion to sever at close of evidence in instant joint trial. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in admitting defendant’s text messages that contained defendant’s drug dealing conversations that occurred both before and after charged bank robbery offense, where said evidence was admissible to show defendant’s motive to commit robbery. Ct. rejected defendant’s argument that said evidence constituted improper propensity evidence and noted that text messages could have admitted into evidence in separate trial on charged drug offenses. Too, Dist. Ct. did not err in admitting testimony of police agent, who testified in dual capacity as expert on drug code language and as fact witness, where nature of government questioning clarified that agent was basing his testimony on his expertise, and where Dist. Ct. gave instruction that clarified difference between agent’s expert testimony and his fact testimony. Record also contained sufficient evidence to support defendant’s convictions on all charged offenses. Ct. rejected defendant’s argument that his sentencing guideline range was inaccurate because Dist. Ct. had improperly double-counted guns that formed basis for his brandishing firearm in furtherance of bank robbery offense and carrying firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking crime.