John Lohden, a confidential informant, and Dayton Peterson orchestrated a series of violent crimes in Kentucky between 2021 and 2022. They kidnapped suspects, stole drugs and firearms, and extorted money while posing as law enforcement. In one incident, Lohden kidnapped Anthony Bishop, blindfolded him, and demanded ransom. In another, Lohden and Peterson, wearing body armor and claiming to have a search warrant, entered Jose Manuel Avila-Galaviz's home, stole over 80 pounds of drugs, 17 firearms, and cash, and kidnapped Avila. They were charged with kidnapping, robbery, impersonating a federal officer, and various drug and firearm offenses. A jury convicted both defendants on all charges. Lohden was sentenced to 39 years, and Peterson to 30 years. On appeal, they challenged the admission of evidence, the search of an abandoned car, the competency of Lohden, the denial of a plea deal, the joinder of their trials, and the sufficiency of the evidence.
The Sixth Circuit addressed several distinct legal issues. First, regarding the text messages found in Lohden's car, the court applied Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). Although the government had not provided pretrial notice for these specific messages, the court found 'good cause' to admit them because the defendants' opening statements disavowed knowing participation in the crimes. The messages, which showed the defendants planning another robbery, rebutted their claims of ignorance. The court found no abuse of discretion in admitting this evidence to show intent and knowledge. Second, Lohden argued the search of his abandoned car violated the Fourth Amendment. The court rejected this, noting that Lohden had abandoned the vehicle after a high-speed chase and fled on foot. Because he had no subjective expectation of privacy in the abandoned car, the search was lawful. Third, the court addressed Lohden's competency and plea deal arguments. It found no clear error in the district court's determination that Lohden was competent to be sentenced. Regarding the plea deal, the court held there is no constitutional right to a plea bargain. The government was free to make a contingent offer requiring both co-defendants to plead guilty, and Lohden had no right to the deal when Peterson refused. Finally, the court addressed Peterson's challenges. It found no plain error in joining the trials, as the crimes were logically interrelated. On sufficiency of evidence, the court emphasized that physical evidence is not a prerequisite for conviction and that a rational jury could infer intent to distribute drugs from the quantity stolen and the defendants' text messages. The court also declined to reweigh the sentencing factors, noting the sentence was below the guidelines range.
The convictions and sentences for kidnapping, robbery, and impersonating a federal officer stand. The decision clarifies that defendants who claim ignorance in opening statements may open the door to evidence of other crimes to rebut those claims, even without prior notice. It also reinforces that abandoned vehicles do not carry a reasonable expectation of privacy. The ruling confirms that prosecutors may condition plea offers on the participation of co-defendants without violating due process. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the affirmation.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download