## Facts

- Federal prosecutors charged David Brian Stone, Sr. and alleged members of the “Hutaree” militia with conspiracy-based offenses arising from an investigation into the group’s weapons training and anti-government rhetoric.
- The government alleged defendants stockpiled firearms, trained in paramilitary fashion, discussed explosives, and spoke about killing law-enforcement officers (sometimes called “the Brotherhood”).
- The alleged triggering event discussed in recordings and communications was killing a police officer and then attacking the officer’s funeral (including by explosives) to draw additional law-enforcement officers into a larger confrontation.
- The indictment included seditious conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384), conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction (18 U.S.C. § 2332a(a)(2)), and firearms counts tied to those predicate crimes (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)), along with other weapons-related charges.
- After the government presented its case-in-chief at jury trial, defendants moved for judgments of acquittal under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29 on the core conspiracy counts.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendants agreed to “levy war” against the United States or oppose its authority by force, as required for seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 2384.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove an actual agreement and specific intent to use “weapons of mass destruction” (explosive devices) as charged under 18 U.S.C. § 2332a(a)(2), rather than generalized, conditional talk and training.
3. Whether related § 924(c) firearms counts could stand where the alleged predicate “crimes of violence” were the charged conspiracies.

## Decision

- The court granted Rule 29 judgments of acquittal on the seditious-conspiracy count and the conspiracy-to-use-WMD count, concluding the evidence was legally insufficient.
- The court also acquitted defendants on § 924(c) counts to the extent those counts depended on the acquitted conspiracy offenses as predicates.
- The court permitted certain remaining, lesser weapons-related charges based on individual conduct (including possession-type offenses) to proceed.

## Legal Principles

- Under Rule 29, a court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government but must enter a judgment of acquittal when no rational jury could find each element proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Seditious conspiracy requires proof of a concrete agreement and specific intent to use force against the United States in the manner covered by § 2384; hatred of police and violent rhetoric, without a defined plan and objective directed at the United States, is insufficient.
- A conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction requires proof of an agreement and specific intent to employ covered devices in a criminal attack; speculative inferences drawn from training and hypothetical discussions do not satisfy the elements.
- Courts must guard against convictions based on ideology, association, or inflammatory speech rather than proof of the charged agreement and intent.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that the government’s proof showed, at most, hostile ideology, weapons training, and conditional discussions of violence, but not a specific, shared agreement to levy war against the United States or to use explosive devices as charged; it therefore entered mid-trial acquittals on the principal conspiracy counts and any dependent § 924(c) counts, while leaving certain individual weapons offenses for further adjudication.


United States v. Stone, No. 10-20123, 2012 WL 1034937 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 27, 2012)