[PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 21-13990 ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOHN THOMAS BURNETTE,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 4:18-cr-00076-RH-EMT-3 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-13990 Document: 65-1 Date Filed: 04/11/2023 Page: 2 of 51

2 Opinion of the Court 21-13990

Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges. NEWSOM, Circuit Judge: Real-estate developer John Burnette was convicted on mul- tiple counts arising out of his alleged complicity in the bribery of Tallahassee City Commissioner Scott Maddox. On appeal, Bur- nette challenges his bribery-based convictions on several grounds, two of which require us to carefully examine the Supreme Court’s decision in McDonnell v. United States, 579 U.S. 550 (2016), which explained—and by all accounts narrowed to some degree—the cat- egory of “official acts” that can support a federal bribery charge. Burnette separately contests his conviction for making false state- ments to federal agents during the course of their investigation. After careful consideration of Burnette’s McDonnell-related arguments, his challenges to two evidentiary rulings, and his attack on his false-statements conviction, we affirm. I John Burnette controlled a substantial real-estate syndicate in Tallahassee, Florida. In the course of his business, he became “friend[s]” with Tallahassee City Commissioner Scott Maddox. Doc. 461 at 35. In 2015, the FBI initiated an undercover operation to investigate public corruption in Tallahassee. Two agents cre- ated a fictitious company called Southern Pines and posed as a property developer, Michael Miller, and an investor, Michael Sweet. Doc. 456 at 141–43, 161. “Miller” and “Sweet” befriended Burnette and, over the course of several months, engaged in USCA11 Case: 21-13990 Document: 65-1 Date Filed: 04/11/2023 Page: 3 of 51

21-13990 Opinion of the Court 3

discussions about development opportunities with him and Mad- dox—many of which the agents secretly recorded. Doc. 456 at 144–45; Doc. 440-2 passim. Burnette, Miller, and Sweet together pinpointed two pro- jects for further consideration. First, they would encourage Talla- hassee officials to “annex” a parcel of land called Fallschase, which was situated just outside the city limits, in order to increase its value. Doc. 456 at 173–74 (Miller); Doc. 440-2 at 47–49 (Burnette). Second, they would aim to convince officials to approve a Request for Proposal authorizing the city to invite potential developers (like themselves) to bid for a city-owned property called Myers Park. Doc. 456 at 194–95 (Miller); Doc. 459 at 178–79 (Sweet); Doc. 457 at 14–15 (Miller); Doc. 440-2 at 7–9 (Burnette). In recorded conversations in July and September 2016, Bur- nette instructed Miller and Sweet that they would need to pay Mad- dox for his v