Former Chicken Shack owner still fighting his drug conviction

In 2004, Antwoyn Spencer and his brothers realized a childhood dream by opening Harold’s Chicken Shack, a Chicago’s South Side staple, on West Broadway in North Minneapolis.  “Since there is a large population of people from Chicago in Minnesota, they wanted to bring a piece of their hometown there,” said Jaz Christian, a friend of Spencer.

But the chicken eatery and a rap group Spencer tried to start didn’t last long. Days after Harold’s closed in 2006, the federal government indicted Spencer and his siblings for distributing cocaine and laundering money. Spencer and his brother Derrick were convicted and sentenced to federal prison. A third brother, who was only indicted for money laundering, was acquitted. 

Spencer and his friends and family say he was targeted and have been fighting for his freedom ever since. 

Journey to federal prison

Spencer’s journey to federal prison starts with a traffic stop in Kansas. In August 2006, Kansas state troopers pulled over John Nguyen (pronounced “win”), a Richardson, Texas resident, for erratically driving. After he allowed troopers to search the vehicle, troopers found eight packages of cocaine hidden in a spare tire. 

Nguyen, convicted and facing a minimum of 10 years in prison because of a prior conviction, turned state’s evidence and testified he transported drugs to Spencer five times in 2006. Investigators found a phone associated with Nguyen was used to constantly contact two phone lines they believed were associated with Spencer. 

With testimony from four additional witnesses who knew and dealt drugs with Spencer growing up, including one who distributed a package of cocaine that looked similar to a package found in the vehicle Nguyen was driving, Spencer was convicted and sentenced on January 15, 2009, to 324 months in federal prison. He is currently projected to be released in September 2030. Spencer was also convicted of money laundering for passing money to people to deposit into their bank accounts so he could get a check to purchase a home in Brooklyn Park. 

Spencer’s defense, friends, and family members contended the witnesses were motivated to cooperate in exchange for a reduced sentence. The defense also questioned Nguyen’s credibility because he was not forthright with officers when interviewed. 

 “I was more scared for my family and friends. I didn’t know what was going to happen,” said Nguyen about why he lied, according to trial transcripts. 

To this day, Spencer and his friends deny he ever dealt cocaine and laundered money. “He was never responsible for cocaine. They raided his home and his family’s homes and found no money or drugs. At the time of his arrest, he wasn’t caught with any money or drugs,” said Christian. 

Reduced sentence?

Fast forward to 2018, when Congress passed the First Step Act, allowing those incarcerated in the federal system to reduce their sentences based on their behavior or conviction. 

Spencer unsuccessfully sought resentencing under the act. On July 26, 2019, Judge John R. Tunheim, who oversaw the case, said Spencer was not eligible because his crimes were not covered. Although Spencer successfully appealed in 2021, Tunheim decided not to resentence him because the act did not change his sentence or what Spencer was found to have done. 

“Reducing Spencer’s sentence would create sentencing disparities, minimize the seriousness of his crimes, and pose a risk to the public given the scope of the criminal operation Spencer was involved in,” said Tunheim in his brief. Tunheim, who re-sentenced Spencer’s brother Derrick to 240 months, said even if he did re-sentence Spencer for his cocaine conviction and he served it out, he would still be in prison for money laundering. 

Spencer unsuccessfully appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. Spencer and his friends and family continue to appeal for a resentencing because they believe the 2021 appeal decision, which “reversed and remanded” Tunheim’s decision not to resentence him, means Tunheim must resentence him. 

Mark Osler, a law professor at the University of St. Thomas, says a “reverse and remand” doesn’t mean the judge has to resentence him. “Typically, ‘reverse and remand’ means it is sent back to the trial court to follow the rule announced by the appellate court (often addressing a specific error, like failure to explain the basis of something). The trial court can apply, then fix the error, and either come to the same conclusion or a different one,” Osler said in an email.

With his appeals exhausted, Spencer decided to try to get his case dismissed in June 2022, saying his indictment did not comply with the Fifth Amendment. Tunheim denied his motion in October 2022, saying he was factually inaccurate. Friends and family continue to demand his release, saying his indictment was never signed by the prosecuting attorney. 

Osler believes issues with the indictment should have been raised at trial. “An indictment only requires that the proofs show probable cause, while a conviction has to meet the much higher standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. He has been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. After conviction, defects in the indictment are usually moot,” Osler said. 

Aspirations upon release

As Spencer sits in a cell or spends time in the law library at the Federal Prison Camp in Duluth, Christian, Spencer’s friend, says Spencer wants to do many things upon his release. “He doesn’t specifically narrow it down to one or two things. He definitely feels as though he was robbed of his music career and wants to give others the opportunity that was taken from him,” Christian said. 

Spencer also told Christian he wants to study law, write about his legal system challenges, and rekindle his relationship with his son and daughter. Christian says Antwoyn’s daughter has been accepted to Clemson, Baylor, Arizona State, Georgia State, and the University of Minnesota.