## Facts

- A wooden sailboat left Haiti for the United States with about 89 Haitian nationals aboard, including Fritznel Reme and Fritz Pierrot.
- After roughly three weeks at sea, the boat landed at Miami Beach; the passengers lacked visas or other lawful entry documents.
- A federal grand jury indicted Reme, Pierrot, and others for (1) conspiracy to bring illegal aliens into the United States and (2) substantive counts for transporting or attempting to transport 14 named aliens.
- At trial, several passengers testified that Pierrot acted as captain and that Reme and Pierrot exercised operational control, including steering, rationing food and water, and using violence against passengers.
- Passengers also testified about a voyage “voodoo ceremony” attributed to Pierrot, after which two accused passengers disappeared; the government offered this evidence to show authority and control, countering the defense claim that defendants were merely passengers.
- A jury convicted both defendants on the conspiracy count and all substantive transportation counts; Pierrot also challenged his sentence on appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Reme and Pierrot conspired to and did transport illegal aliens, rather than being mere passengers.
2. Whether the district court erred by admitting testimony about abuse of passengers and the “voodoo ceremony” and disappearances, given the risk of unfair prejudice.
3. Whether any sentencing error required vacatur of Pierrot’s sentence and remand.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed both defendants’ convictions on all counts.
- The court held the passenger testimony, if credited, was sufficient to support findings that defendants exercised control consistent with transporting aliens.
- The court held admission of the “voodoo ceremony” and related conduct evidence was within the district court’s discretion because it was probative of defendants’ role and authority and not admitted solely to prove bad character.
- The court vacated Pierrot’s sentence and remanded for a new sentencing hearing.

## Legal Principles

- In sufficiency review, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the government; it need not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, and credibility choices belong to the jury.
- Evidence of conduct during the charged events may be admissible to prove a material issue such as control or role in the offense, even if prejudicial, when not offered solely as propensity evidence.
- Under Fed. R. Evid. 403 and 404(b), trial courts have broad discretion to admit probative evidence and to balance probative value against unfair prejudice; appellate reversal requires a clear abuse of discretion causing substantial prejudice.
- Convictions may be affirmed while a sentence is vacated and remanded when the sentencing process contains error not affecting the verdict.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit upheld the alien-smuggling convictions because passenger testimony supported that the defendants exercised authority over the voyage, and it approved admission of highly charged evidence about onboard events as probative of control and role; however, it required resentencing for Pierrot due to a sentencing-related error.


United States v. Reme, 738 F.2d 1156 (11th Cir. 1984)