A recent ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the convictions and sentences of two members of the Gangster Disciples gang, Lesley Chappell Green and Philmon Deshawn Chambers. Both men were found guilty of participating in a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) conspiracy, among other charges. Chambers received two consecutive life sentences plus an additional term of imprisonment. Green was also sentenced to life in prison.
The court’s opinion provides a detailed look into the Gangster Disciples, their operations, and the specific events that led to the convictions.
The Gangster Disciples: A Criminal Enterprise
The court’s opinion paints a stark picture of the Gangster Disciples. Described as a “mob,” the gang was founded in Chicago in the late 1960s. The gang has a presence in numerous states, both inside and outside of prison. The Gangster Disciples operate under a strict, hierarchical structure, with a “pyramid-like” organization. At the top is the “Chairman,” Larry Hoover, who has led the gang from prison since the 1970s. Below him are the board of directors, the governor of governors, state governors and assistant governors, regents, first coordinators, and finally, the “foot soldiers.”
The Gangster Disciples are involved in a wide array of criminal activities, including murder, robbery, extortion, drug trafficking, and prostitution. Money generated from these crimes flows up through the gang’s structure, with some funds used for “aid & assistance” to members, including those in hiding from law enforcement. The gang also maintains safehouses.
The gang places a strong emphasis on secrecy. The “Number One Rule” is “silence & secrecy,” meaning members are forbidden from discussing the organization with anyone outside of it. Violating this rule can result in death. The gang employs “enforcers” to punish those who break the rules, and these enforcers are known to be “trigger pullers” who are willing to use violence.
The Murders and the Conspiracy
The case against Green and Chambers stemmed from the murder of Walter Brown, a Gangster Disciples member in Athens-Clarke County, Georgia. Following Brown’s death, retaliation was sought. Chambers, the gang’s chief enforcer for Georgia, and his girlfriend, Andrea Browner, began searching for the suspected shooter.
When they couldn’t find the primary target, they set their sights on the suspected shooter’s cousin, Rodriguez Rucker. Browner, working as a prostitute, arranged to meet Rucker at a hotel. She then alerted Chambers to Rucker’s location.
Also at the hotel was Joshua Jackson, a Gangster Disciple who was suspected of “snitching” on the gang. Browner warned Chambers to avoid being seen by Jackson, who was considered untrustworthy. Chambers followed Rucker to his home and shot him multiple times in the back.
After the murder, Chambers and Browner fled to a Gangster Disciples safehouse. Police tracked them down and arrested Browner. During a search of Browner’s car, police found evidence linking Chambers to the gang, including a list naming Green as a member of the gang’s enforcement team.
Chambers, suspecting that Jackson had “snitched” about Rucker’s murder, instructed Green to “handle the business of the Nation” by dealing with Jackson. Green, along with other gang members, lured Jackson and Derrick Ruff to a storage unit under the guise of committing a theft. Once inside, Green shot and killed both Jackson and Ruff.
Chambers was later arrested in Texas. While in jail, he wrote a letter expressing his frustration with Green, claiming that Green had not followed instructions.
Legal Challenges and the Court’s Decision
Both Green and Chambers appealed their convictions and sentences. The court addressed multiple arguments raised by the defendants.
Green’s Arguments:
* RICO Conspiracy: Green argued that the government did not prove that the murders of Jackson and Ruff were committed “in furtherance of the G-side Gangster Disciples…enterprise.” The court rejected this argument, finding sufficient evidence that Green, as an enforcer, was acting on behalf of the gang and its rules of silence and secrecy.
* Wiretap Evidence: Green challenged the admissibility of wiretap evidence, claiming it was not properly obtained. The court affirmed that the wiretaps were legal under federal and Georgia law.
* Hearsay and Confrontation Clause: Green argued that Chambers’s jailhouse letter was inadmissible hearsay and violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. The court ruled that the letter was a co-conspirator statement and that the statements were not “testimonial” and therefore did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
* Evidence Exhibits: Green challenged the introduction of the “E Team Jan. 2016” list and photos of ballistic vests and plates. The court found that this evidence was relevant and not unduly prejudicial.
Chambers’s Arguments:
* Motion for Continuance: Chambers argued that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for a continuance to allow his stand-by counsel time to prepare. The court rejected this argument, citing Chambers’s own actions in delaying the proceedings.
* Anonymous Jury: Chambers argued that the district court erred in its procedures for empaneling an anonymous jury. The court found no plain error.
* Shackling Procedure: Chambers argued that the court’s shackling procedure was improper. The court found no plain error, as the jury did not see the shackles.
* Cumulative Error: Chambers argued that the cumulative effect of the errors deprived him of a fair trial. The court rejected this argument, as it found no errors.
* Sentencing Error – Firearm: Chambers claimed the court erred by applying the wrong mandatory minimum sentence for his firearm conviction. The court found this error to be harmless, as it would not change his ultimate term of imprisonment.
* Sentencing Error – Double Jeopardy: Chambers argued the district court erred in its decision on how to merge convictions. The court found no error, and alternatively, that any error was harmless.
* Restitution Order: Chambers challenged the district court’s order requiring him to pay restitution to the victim’s father. The court upheld the restitution order, citing a recent clarifying amendment to the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decisions on all issues, upholding the convictions and sentences of Green and Chambers.