## Facts

- Michael Howard Reed and Gregory Allen Davis claimed that membership in the “Little Shell Nation” meant they were not subject to federal jurisdiction.
- After Judge Daniel Hovland denied Reed’s motion to dismiss a federal firearm charge, Reed and Davis pursued retaliation through purported commercial and legal filings.
- Davis electronically filed a UCC financing statement in Washington, D.C., listing as “debtors” the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, Judge Hovland, and Acting U.S. Attorney Lynn C. Jordheim.
- The filing asserted fictitious, multi-million-dollar indebtedness tied to Reed’s criminal case and alleged “copyright” interests in Reed’s name; it was accepted automatically and became an immediate public record.
- At trial, Judge Hovland and Jordheim testified they owed Davis no debt.
- Separately, Reed delivered a “Notice of Default” to the courthouse clerk’s office claiming a $3.4 million obligation, and he had previously threatened another federal judge after adverse rulings involving Little Shell members.
- The government charged Reed and Davis with conspiring to file and filing false liens against federal officials (18 U.S.C. § 1521); Reed was additionally charged with corruptly obstructing the due administration of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503(a)).
- After a jury trial, both defendants were convicted on the § 1521 counts, and Reed was convicted on the § 1503(a) count; both defendants had represented themselves at trial with standby assistance available.

## Issues

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported Davis’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1521 for filing (or conspiring to file) a “false lien or encumbrance” against federal officials, knowing or having reason to know it was false, because of their performance of official duties.
2. Whether the district court violated Reed’s and Davis’s Sixth Amendment rights by permitting self-representation where their views were unconventional, including whether their waivers of counsel were knowing, voluntary, and intelligent and whether competency concerns required denial of pro se status.
3. Whether sufficient evidence supported Reed’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1503(a) for corruptly endeavoring to obstruct the due administration of justice through threats and related retaliatory conduct against federal judges.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed all convictions.
- The court held that Davis’s UCC financing statement qualified as a “lien or encumbrance” for § 1521 purposes, and the evidence permitted findings of falsity, knowledge, and retaliation based on officials’ performance of their duties.
- The court held that the district court properly allowed Reed and Davis to proceed pro se because their waivers of counsel were valid and the record did not show incompetence requiring further inquiry or denial of self-representation.
- The court upheld Reed’s § 1503(a) conviction, concluding the evidence supported a finding that Reed’s threats and related acts were a corrupt effort to obstruct the administration of justice.

## Legal Principles

- For 18 U.S.C. § 1521, a publicly filed UCC financing statement that purports to impose a large, fictitious obligation on identified federal officials may constitute a “false lien or encumbrance,” even if it does not precisely describe specific collateral, where it functions to burden or impair interests associated with property and credit.
- A jury may infer § 1521’s retaliatory motive element (“because of the performance of official duties”) from timing, linkage to an official proceeding, and the filing’s content tying the claimed debt to the official acts.
- A defendant’s unusual or pseudo-legal beliefs do not, without objective indicia of incompetence, invalidate a waiver of counsel; a court may accept self-representation if the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent and trial fairness is protected through appropriate management and standby counsel.
- Under 18 U.S.C. § 1503(a), threats and retaliatory acts directed at federal judges in response to judicial decisions may support a finding of a corrupt endeavor to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of justice.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit affirmed convictions arising from retaliatory “paper terrorism” against federal officials, holding that a fictitious UCC filing can be a false encumbrance under § 1521 and that defendants who knowingly waive counsel may represent themselves despite sovereign-citizen-style beliefs, absent objective evidence of incompetence.


United States v. Reed, 668 F.3d 978 (8th Cir. 2012)