Federal Judiciary

To Protect and Serve . . . and Set Fires?

By Robert Loblaw

U.S. v. Mock, 06-15861 (11^th Cir., April 14, 2008)

U.S. v. Eff, 07-40338 (5^th Cir., April 14, 2008)

In a bit of a coincidence, today?s federal appellate decisions include two appeals from convicted arsonists. Federal arson trials are rare enough, but the coincidence is even more striking: both of the defendants are ex-law enforcement.

The Eleventh Circuit decision deals with the appeal of James Mock, a former policeman who was convicted of setting fourteen fires in the stairwells of apartment buildings. The Court affirms his conviction but vacates his sentence because the district court used the guidelines for attempted murder without doing the necessary fact-finding.

Meanwhile, the Fifth Circuit affirms the conviction of Ryan Eff, a firefighter for the National Forest Service who set forest fires in order to get more experience and make more money. Eff tried to claim insanity, arguing that he had an extra x-chromosome. He hired experts to testify that this genetic defect resulted in childlike decision-making and magical thinking, leaving him with the moral reasoning abilities of a preteen. But the district court refused to instruct the jury on insanity, or even to allow his experts to testify. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit determines that any error was harmless, because the portion of the experts? testimony that may have been admissible did not support an insanity defense.

Full post as published by Decision of the Day on April 14, 2008 (boomark / email).