United States v. Samuel Lee Jones

── United States v. Samuel Lee Jones ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: May 04, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 24-13220 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 05/04/2026 Page: 1 of 15 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-13220 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SAMUEL LEE JONES, a.k.a. Samuel Lee Tyson, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 0:23-cr-60204-RNS-1 ____________________ Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, and ABUDU and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 24-13220 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 05/04/2026 Page: 2 of 15 2 Opinion of the Court 24-13220 Samuel Jones appeals his conviction for knowingly pos- sessing a firearm and ammunition as a felon and his sentence as an armed career criminal. 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e)(1). Jones chal- lenges the use of surrogate DNA expert testimony, the sufficiency of the evidence, the constitutionality of section 922(g), jury instruc- tions about the “different occasions” requirement under section 924(e), and the imposition of a sentence under section 924(e) based on predicate offenses other than those found by the jury. No re- versible error occurred. We affirm. I. BACKGROUND A grand jury indicted Jones for knowingly possessing a fire- arm and ammunition as a felon. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The indict- ment alleged that he had three prior convictions for offenses com- mitted on separate occasions. Id. § 924(e). Jones pleaded not guilty. Before trial, the government filed a notice of intent to intro- duce expert testimony of Jerome Remm, a forensic DNA analyst. Remm had compared Jones’s DNA profile with samples recovered from a gun found near Jones at the time of his arrest. The govern- ment amended its notice to substitute Daniel Aguilar, another DNA analyst, for Remm because of a scheduling conflict. The gov- ernment reported that the substance of the testimony would re- main unchanged and that Aguilar had served as the technical re- viewer for Remm’s report and concurred with Remm’s findings. The government stated that Aguilar would testify to the compari- son Remm conducted and explain the basis for his approval of USCA11 Case: 24-13220 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 05/04/2026 Page: 3 of 15 24-13220 Opinion of the Court 3 Remm’s conclusions. Separately, the parties submitted joint pro- posed jury instructions and a special verdict form for the second phase of trial to determine Jones’s eligibility for an enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act. These instructions tasked the jury with determining whether the government proved, be- yond a reasonable doubt, that Jones had three or more prior felony convictions “committed on occasions different from one another.” At trial, the prosecution’s case-in-chief focused on the events of January 16, 2023, during which Detective Danielle Lamparelli and Officer Sean Jaycox coordina