UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ADAM DEAN FOX (23-1014); BARRY GORDON CROFT, JR. (23-1029) - Articles

All Content

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ADAM DEAN FOX (23-1014); BARRY GORDON CROFT, JR. (23-1029)

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Apr 1, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Steven S. Nolder, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant in 23-1014. Timothy F. Sweeney, LAW OFFICE OF TIMOTHY F. SWEENEY, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant in 23-1029.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Nils R. Kessler, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Steven S. Nolder, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant in 23-1014. Timothy F. Sweeney, LAW OFFICE OF TIMOTHY F. SWEENEY, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant in 23- 1029.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Nils R. Kessler, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellee.

Judge(s): LARSEN, READLER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids

PER CURIAM. During the summer of 2020, Adam Fox and Barry Croft, Jr. hatched an elaborate plan to kidnap Michigan’s Governor, Gretchen Whitmer. A federal jury convicted both men on all charges, and the district court sentenced Fox to 192 months’ imprisonment and Croft to 235 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Defendants argue that there was insufficient evidence to convict them of the charges and that the district court erred by: (1) declining to conduct a “Remmer” hearing to allow questioning of an allegedly biased juror, pursuant to Remmer v. United States, 347 U.S. 227 (1954); (2) limiting the defense’s time for cross- examination of a co-conspirator; and (3) limiting the scope of the admissibility of certain government informant statements. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

Attachments: