## Facts

- The United States prosecuted Giovanni Lara and other members of the Providence, Rhode Island Latin Kings for racketeering and related violent crimes.
- The case was tried as a lengthy multi-defendant federal jury trial involving alleged gang discipline, violence, and intimidation.
- One episode involved Temujin Vandergroen, who drove with George Perry and Lara in Vandergroen’s car; Perry had a sawed-off shotgun.
- The group went to a more isolated area; Perry shot Vandergroen in the back of the head.
- Evidence at trial supported that Lara knew about the gun, participated in events leading up to the killing, and helped dispose of Vandergroen’s body and the vehicle afterward.
- Lara was convicted of carjacking resulting in death under 18 U.S.C. § 2119(3) and witness intimidation under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3), among other racketeering-related counts.
- At sentencing on the carjacking count, the district court applied the Sentencing Guidelines cross-reference that treats a killing as first-degree murder when the facts meet that standard, and imposed a life sentence (with a concurrent term on the intimidation count).
- During the defense case, co-defendant George Perry testified. On direct examination, he was asked only about one charged incident (the carjacking).
- On cross-examination, the prosecutor questioned Perry about other Latin Kings crimes beyond the specific event covered on direct.
- On appeal, Perry and other defendants challenged the trial court’s evidentiary rulings (including the scope of cross-examination) and challenged aspects of the convictions and sentences.

## Issues

1. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 611(b), did the district court abuse its discretion by allowing the government to cross-examine George Perry about other gang crimes when his direct examination addressed only the carjacking episode?
2. Was the evidence sufficient to sustain Lara’s conviction for carjacking resulting in death under 18 U.S.C. § 2119(3) based on his role in the events leading to and following the killing?
3. Did the district court err in applying the Sentencing Guidelines cross-reference that treated the killing as first-degree murder for purposes of sentencing on the carjacking conviction?

## Decision

- The First Circuit affirmed the judgments of conviction and sentences.
- The court rejected the Rule 611(b) challenge and held that the trial judge acted within the discretion granted by the Rules of Evidence in permitting cross-examination that went beyond the narrow topic covered on direct, particularly where it bore on credibility and the witness’s account of related criminal conduct.
- The court upheld Lara’s carjacking-resulting-in-death conviction, concluding the record permitted the jury to find him a knowing participant in the offense conduct.
- The court upheld the life sentence, agreeing that the district court did not commit reversible error in applying the Guidelines murder cross-reference based on its findings about the manner of the killing and Lara’s involvement.

## Legal Principles

- Federal Rule of Evidence 611(b) generally limits cross-examination to the subject matter of direct examination and matters affecting credibility, but the rule also permits the trial court to allow inquiry into additional matters; appellate review is deferential and focuses on abuse of discretion.
- A trial court may allow broader cross-examination where it tests a witness’s credibility, bias, motive, or selective account of events, even if the defense direct examination addressed only part of the charged conduct.
- For carjacking resulting in death, a defendant’s culpability may be established through proof of knowing participation in the taking and in conduct leading to the death, including aid before and after the killing.
- Under the Sentencing Guidelines applicable to robbery/carjacking offenses, a sentencing court may apply a cross-reference to the homicide guideline when the victim was killed under circumstances that would constitute murder; factual findings supporting that application are reviewed for clear error.

## Conclusion

United States v. Lara affirmed convictions and sentences arising from a Latin Kings racketeering prosecution, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion under Rule 611(b) by permitting the government to cross-examine George Perry about other gang crimes beyond the narrow focus of his direct testimony, and further affirming Lara’s carjacking-resulting-in-death conviction and life sentence, including the use of the Guidelines murder cross-reference.


United States v. Lara, 181 F.3d 183 (1999)