133130P.pdf   04/16/2015  United States  v.  Rodney Anderson
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-3130
                          and No:  13-3131
                          and No:  13-3132
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City   
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Bye and Colloton, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Defendants had no good cause 
   for their failure to raise their double-jeopardy argument before trial and 
   the issue would not be considered; however, even considering the issue 
   under plain error analysis, the court's prior cases about the lack of 
   clarity of legislative intent with respect to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 844(h), the 
   plain language of the section, and the novelty of a precedent from another 
   circuit relied on by defendants does not convince the court that the 
   district court committed plain error in determining that defendants' Sec. 
   844(h) convictions for use of fire to commit another felony created 
   impermissible double punishment under the Double Jeopardy Clause; no error 
   in denying motion for severance; evidentiary challenges rejected; no Sixth 
   Amendment error in limiting cross-examination of a witness since the 
   incident defendant Sorrentino sought to cross-examine the witness about 
   went to possible bias, an issue he had already covered at length in his 
   cross-examination of the witness, his ex-wife; evidence was sufficient to 
   support defendant Anderson's convictions for conspiracy to commit mail 
   fraud and arson, as well as aiding and abetting arson, mail fraud and use 
   of fire to commit another felony; no error in denying motion for new trial 
   based on newly-discovered evidence as the cell phone records defendants 
   relied on would not have been likely to produce an acquittal.