United States v. Erik Maund -Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville

Circuit 6Feb 23, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 68/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Reversed

In this appeal arising from a murder-for-hire prosecution, the Sixth Circuit held that the district court erred in granting a new trial after jurors inadvertently received several unadmitted exhibits during deliberations. The panel concluded that the mistake was not structural error and that, applying harmless-error review, any prejudice was insignificant in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt; it therefore reversed the order granting a new trial and remanded.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Which party bears the burden of proof at a Remmer hearing when jurors were exposed to an external influence—the defendant (must show actual prejudice) or the government (must show the error was harmless)?

Circuit Positions

Circuit 6(this circuit)

Defendant must prove actual prejudice at a Remmer hearing.

Circuit 1Circuit 2Circuit 3Circuit 4Circuit 5Circuit 7Circuit 8Circuit 9Circuit 10Circuit 11

Government must prove the contact was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Conflict Summary

The Sixth Circuit places the burden on the defendant to prove actual prejudice from the extraneous influence, whereas every other circuit to have addressed the issue requires the government to prove the contact was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:United States of America
Appellee:Erik Charles Maund; Bryon Brockway; Adam Carey

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Nicholas J. Goldin, Robert E. McGuire, Rascoe Dean, Brooke Carey Farzad – United States Attorney’s Office, Nashville, TN
Appellee:David M. Gonzalez (Sumpter & González, L.L.P.); Luke A. Evans (Fiola Parker); Benjamin H. Perry (Law Office of Benjamin H. Perry); Samuel E. Bassett & Perry Q. Minton (Minton, Bassett, Flore & Carsey); John-David H. Thomas (Barnes & Thornburg, L.L.P.); John Bailey (Brentwood, TN)