## Facts

- Federal authorities investigated the Branch Davidians at the Mount Carmel compound near Waco, Texas, based on suspected unlawful firearms, including automatic weapons.
- The group, led by David Koresh, trained with firearms, stockpiled weapons and ammunition, and fortified the compound in anticipation of conflict with the government.
- ATF agents obtained an arrest warrant for Koresh and a search warrant for the compound and attempted to execute them on February 28, 1993.
- A firefight occurred during the attempted execution of the warrants, resulting in the deaths of four ATF agents and three compound residents, with additional injuries.
- A 51-day standoff followed; federal agents later introduced tear gas, fires erupted, and many occupants died.
- A federal grand jury indicted surviving members on counts including conspiracy and offenses tied to killing or attempting to kill federal officers, along with firearms offenses under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
- After a lengthy trial, the jury convicted certain defendants of aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter of federal officers and convicted several defendants of § 924(c) firearms offenses, including counts involving machineguns; the district court imposed substantial prison sentences with enhancements based on machinegun “use.”

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter of federal officers and for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
2. Whether the jury instructions on self-defense and defense of others, including as applied to voluntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense, were erroneous.
3. Whether acquittals on certain conspiracy counts rendered the § 924(c) convictions impermissibly inconsistent.
4. Whether use of an anonymous jury and related security measures violated the defendants’ right to a fair trial.
5. Whether exclusion of portions of a defendant’s post-arrest statement was an abuse of discretion.
6. Whether § 924(c) machinegun-enhanced sentences could stand after Bailey v. United States required “active employment” to prove “use.”

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the convictions for aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter of federal officers.
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the § 924(c) firearm convictions in general, rejecting insufficiency arguments.
- The court held the jury instructions, considered as a whole, adequately addressed self-defense and did not require reversal.
- The court rejected challenges based on alleged inconsistent verdicts, concluding they did not warrant reversal and were not logically irreconcilable.
- The court upheld the anonymous jury procedure given the case’s publicity and safety concerns, finding adequate safeguards against prejudice.
- The court found no reversible error in excluding portions of the challenged post-arrest statement (either proper exclusion or harmless error).
- The court vacated sentences to the extent they depended on § 924(c) enhancements for “use” of a machinegun and remanded for resentencing consistent with Bailey’s “active employment” standard.

## Legal Principles

- Evidence may be sufficient for aiding-and-abetting liability where a rational jury can infer knowing participation in a coordinated armed offense, even without proof of which defendant fired the fatal shots.
- Jury instructions are reviewed as a whole; a challenged omission does not require reversal if the overall charge adequately conveys the governing law and does not impair the defense.
- Inconsistent verdicts generally do not justify reversal; acquittal on conspiracy does not preclude convictions for substantive offenses arising from the same events.
- An anonymous jury is permissible when justified by strong concerns (e.g., extreme publicity and safety risks) and when the court provides safeguards to reduce prejudice and preserve meaningful voir dire.
- Evidentiary exclusions are reviewed for abuse of discretion; exclusion of hearsay or marginally probative material will not warrant reversal absent prejudicial effect.
- Under Bailey, “use” in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) requires active employment of the firearm; enhanced punishment for machinegun “use” requires findings showing active employment of a machinegun, not mere possession or proximity.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit largely upheld the Waco-related convictions, including aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter and § 924(c) firearms offenses, but required resentencing where the district court imposed machinegun “use” enhancements without findings meeting Bailey’s active-employment standard.


United States v. Branch, 91 F.3d 699 (5th Cir. 1996)