United States v. Augustin, No. 09-15985 (11th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseAppellants, Burson Augustin, Stanley Grant Phanor, Patrick Abraham, Rotschild Augustine, and Narseal Batiste, were all convicted of crimes related to terrorist activities and Al Qaeda. On appeal, defendants raised six issues: (1) Batiste and Augustine challenge the district court's order granting in part the government's motion to strike portions of the indictment as surplusage; (2) Augustin, Phanor, and Augustine each challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting their convictions; (3) Augustin argued that the government's involvement in the criminal scheme was outrageous and therefore violated the Due Process Clause; (4) Batiste and Abraham challenged several of the district court's evidentiary rulings relating to the admissibility of lay and expert testimony; (5) Batiste argued that limitations on his cross-examination of witnesses resulted in cumulative error requiring a new trial; and (6) all appellants challenged the district court's dismissal of a juror for refusing to follow the court's instructions on the law. After careful review of the record and the parties' briefs, and after having had the benefit of oral argument, the court affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.