United States v. Grant

Nicholas Grant (defendant) was charged with conspiracy to commit certain gun- and drug-related crimes. At trial, the prosecution called United States Customs Service Special Agent Louis Mozas to testify regarding statements made by Wilson, Grant’s alleged coconspirator, during the conspiracy. Mozas had been undercover when Wilson made the statements to him, and the statements were admissible hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E). Wilson’s statements to Mozas established the existence of a conspiracy by referencing Wilson’s unnamed partner. The statements did not, however, identify Grant as being involved in the conspiracy. On cross-examination, Grant’s counsel asked Mozas if Grant had ever been present during the discussion or commission of the crimes. Mozas responded that Wilson told him that Grant was in Homosassa Springs, near where the crimes were committed, but did not meet with anyone. In response to these hearsay statements, Grant sought to introduce an affidavit that Grant’s counsel had subsequently obtained from Wilson. The affidavit stated that Wilson had worked alone and had fabricated having a partner. The affidavit stated further that Grant had nothing to do with Wilson’s drug activity. Grant sought to introduce the affidavit for the purpose of impeaching Wilson, but the district court declined to admit the affidavit. The court ruled that Wilson’s statements in the affidavit were not inconsistent with Wilson’s earlier statements to Mozas because Wilson had not identified Grant in those statements. Grant was convicted, and he appealed.