Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01209/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01209-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ronald Schroeder
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

PUBLISH 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

13 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff/Appellee ) 

) 

VSo ) 

) 

RONALD SCHROEDER, ) 

) 

Defendant/Appellant) 

No. 89-1209 

F'ILED 

United St:it(*s Courr of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

APR 2 5 1990 

AOBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

(D.C. No. 89-CR-070) 

James K. Bredar, Assistant Federal Public Defender (Michael G. 

Katz, Federal Public Defender for District of Colorado with him on 

the brief), Denver, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellant. 

Thomas M. O'Rourke, Assistant United States Attorney (Michael J. 

Norton, Acting United States Attorney with him on the brief) 

Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee. 

Before McKAY and EBEL, Circuit Judges, and WEST,* District Judge. 

WEST, District Judge. 

Defendant was convicted of one count interstate communication 

of a threat to injure the person of another in violation of 18 

u.s.c. § 875(c). Prior to the use of threatening language, the 

*The Honorable Lee R. West, United States District Judge for 

the Western District of Oklahoma, sitting by designation. 

Appellate Case: 89-1209 Document: 01019623029 Date Filed: 04/25/1990 Page: 1 
defendant sued the government in certain civil suits pro se for 

denial of employment preference under the Veterans Readjustment 

Act. Defendant had no success with these cases. At one point, 

defendant spoke to a William Pharo, Assistant United States 

Attorney, regarding his inability to obtain relief from the 

government. During the telephone conversation with Mr. Pharo, the 

defendant stated that it would be easy to get a gun and walk into 

a post office and start shooting. The defendant also stated that 

the government either gives the defendant money or people would get 

hurt. Finally, the defendant stated that the government will 

either pay in money or blood. Mr. Pharo related this information 

to the grand jury who indicted the defendant under Section 875(c). 

The defendant was adjudged guilty by a jury, and the court 

sentenced the defendant to eighteen months in custody and three 

years' supervised release. The court enhanced the defendant's 

sentence three levels pursuant to a finding that Mr. Pharo was an 

"official victim" under § 3Al.2, Guidelines Manual, which allows 

enhancing the sentence for victims with certain governmental 

status, including Assistant United States Attorneys. 

The defendant assigns the following three errors. First, the 

defendant asserts that the District Court erred in not granting a 

continuance based on Defendant's incompetency due to sleep 

deprivation. Second, the defendant states that the evidence at 

trial was insufficient to convict the defendant of the crime 

charged. Third, the defendant states that the District Court erred 

in computing the offense level under the sentencing guidelines by 

2 

Appellate Case: 89-1209 Document: 01019623029 Date Filed: 04/25/1990 Page: 2 
adding three offense levels upon a finding that Mr. Pharo was an 

official victim. 

For the reasons stated below, this Court AFFIRMS the trial 

court's denial of continuance on the sleep deprivation issue, and 

further AFFIRMS on the sufficiency of evidence to convict the 

defendant. This Court REVERSES on the computation of offense 

level, reducing the offense level by three and reducing defendant's 

sentence to twelve months. 

DISCUSSION 

on the day of trial, defendant's attorney requested that the 

trial be continued on the basis that his client suffered from sleep 

deprivation. The court asked to hear an offer of proof, whereupon 

defendant's attorney stated that defendant Schroeder would testify 

that he was not thinking clearly and was not comfortable going to 

trial in a sleep-deprived state. The trial court explained that 

it had successive criminal cases each week of that month and that 

in order for the trial to be carried over defendant Schroeder would 

have to waive his right to a speedy trial. Defendant Schroeder 

advised his counsel that he would not waive his right to speedy 

trial. After further discussion, the court, assuming the offer of 

proof to be true, nevertheless denied the request for delay. At 

that point, defendant's counsel asked the defendant if he would 

waive his right to a speedy trial, which defendant again refused. 

The Court concluded other preliminary matters and asked: "Is there 

anything else you need to put on the record, Mr. Bredar?" 

[Attorney for defendant.] To which counsel for defendant 

3 

Appellate Case: 89-1209 Document: 01019623029 Date Filed: 04/25/1990 Page: 3 
. ' 

responded: "Thank you, Your Honor. I believe that covers 

everything that needed to be discussed prior to the time the jury 

comes up." Tr. Vol. III, p. 32. 

Defendant now claims that the trial court erred in denying a 

continuance because the trial court failed to place the defendant 

on the stand to determine his state of awareness. This court 

disagrees. Defendant's counsel had an opportunity to make a full 

and complete offer of proof .regarding defendant's alleged 

incompetency and failed to do so. A trial court must hold a 

competency hearing if there is reasonable cause to believe that the 

defendant is impaired to the extent that he is unable to understand 

the nature and consequences of the proceedings and to assist 

properly in his defense. United States·v. Crews, 781 F.2d 826, 833 

(10th Cir. 1986). In this case, the offer .of proof did not state 

that defendant was unable to understand the nature of the 

proceedings, nor that the defendant was unable to assist in his 

defense. Instead, the offer of proof stated that defendant was not 

thinking clearly and did not feel comfortable going to trial in a 

sleep-deprived state. Defendant's counsel failed to make any other 

offer of proof notwithstanding the court's allowance for 

defendant's counsel to put anything else on the record. 

Accordingly, defendant waived his right to assign error where the 

error, if any, might have been avoided by a full and complete offer 

of proof by defendant. Further, the off er of proof which was 

presented to the trial court did not rise to the level requiring 

the trial court to hold a competency hearing. Finally, the trial 

4 

Appellate Case: 89-1209 Document: 01019623029 Date Filed: 04/25/1990 Page: 4 
court could have well inferred from the defendant's twice refusal 

to waive a speedy trial that the defendant in fact understood the 

nature and consequence of the proceedings. Accordingly, the trial 

court did not commit error by refusing the defendant's request for 

a continuance under these circumstances. 

Defendant's second assignment of error that the evidence at 

trial was insufficient to convict the defendant of the crime 

charged was not urged during oral argumento Nevertheless, this 

Court observes that the jury found the evidence to state a 

sufficiently definite threat to meet the requirements of the 

statute. Upon review of the record, we see no error in this 

finding by the jury. 

Finally, the defendant states that the trial court erred in 

raising the level of offense from 10 to 13 by finding that Mr. 

Pharo was a victim under § 3Al.2 of the Guidelines Manual. Th~ 

.. defendant requested the sentence be reduced from eighteen months 

to twelve months reflecting a level 10 offense. This Court agrees 

with defendant's position. 

Nothing in the record indicates that Mr. Pharo received a 

threat directed towards his person. During oral argument, the 

government urged that the receiver of a threat should be deemed a 

victim whether or not the receiver was the object of the threat. 

This Court disagrees. In order to find an official victim for 

purposes of sentencing, this Court finds that the victim must be 

one who is the object of a threat under these facts. Therefore, 

5 

Appellate Case: 89-1209 Document: 01019623029 Date Filed: 04/25/1990 Page: 5 
this Court REVERSES the trial court's finding that Mr. Pharo was 

an official victim for purposes of sentencing. 

Accordingly, this Court AFFIRMS the trial court's denial of 

continuance and AFFIRMS the sufficiency of evidence to convict the 

defendant. This Court REVERSES the finding that Mr. Pharo was an 

official victim, reducing defendant's sentence from eighteen months 

to twelve months. 

6 

Appellate Case: 89-1209 Document: 01019623029 Date Filed: 04/25/1990 Page: 6