# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 8- 23 15

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Alex an de r Ja m es Oka

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta - Abe rd een

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: May 16, 2 01 9 Fi le d: Aug us t 1 , 20 19 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re SM ITH, Chi ef J ud ge , W OLLMAN and KOBES, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Alex an de r Oka ap pe al s hi s co nv ic ti on s f or do m es ti c as sa ul t by a ha bi tu al
of fen de r, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 11 7, an d fo r ta m pe rin g wit h a wit ne ss or vi ct im

, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 15 12 (b )(1 ). Oka arg ue s t h a t t h e g ov ern m en t fai le d to

pr es en t su ffi ci en t ev id en ce at tri al to m eet th e el em en ts of ei th er cri m e. W e ho ld th atsu ffi ci en t ev id en ce ex is ts fro m whi ch a reas on ab le jury co ul d fin d Oka gu il ty on bo th

co un ts . W e th eref

or e aff irm th e d is tri ct co ur t’s jud gm en t. 1

I. Bac kg ro un d
One ni gh t, Oka was at h o me wit h hi s gi rlf rie nd

, Su nd an ce Ro se W hi te Bu ll ; th ei r in fan t ch il d; an d W hi te Bu ll ’s two ol de r ch il dr en

. Ok a a w ok e W hi te Bu ll

, de m an di ng th at sh e feed th ei r ba by. W hi te Bu ll be ga n feed in g th e ba by. Oka be cam e

an gr y wit h W hi te Bu ll aft er read in g a “ fri en d req ue st ” W hi te Bu ll rece iv ed on Face bo ok fro m an ot he r m an

. Oka accu se d W hi te Bu ll of ch eat in g on hi m an d ki ck ed
he r on th e rig ht si de of he r m id ba ck

. The ki ck kn oc ke d th e win d ou t of he r an d

cau se d pa in an d br

ui si ng

. Oka co nt in uo us ly y el le d at an d t h r e at en ed W hi te Bu ll
du rin g t he ep is od e.

W hi te Bu ll ret reat ed to th e ba th ro om , whe re sh e lo ck ed th e do or an d se nt a te xt

m es sa ge to he r si st er to cal l th e po li ce. Sh e al so as ke d he r si st er no t to res po nd to he r
te xt m es sa ge an d de le te d th e ou tg oi n g m es sa ge ou t of fear th at Oka wou ld se e th e

m es sa ge an d ge t ev en an gr ie r. Po li ce arri ve d, in te rv ie wed W hi te Bu ll

, a n d t h en

rem ov ed he r an d t he two ol de r ch il dr en fro m th e h ou se

. 2

The p o l ic e do cu m en te d W hi te Bu ll ’s st or y an d to ok ph ot og rap hs of th e ab ras io n o n her ba ck

. Bas ed on W hi te Bu ll ’s fo rm al co m pl ai nt , po li ce ar res te d Ok a fo r as sa ul ti ng W hi te Bu ll

.

The Hon or ab le Ro be rto A. Lan ge , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of So ut h Dak ot a.

W hi te Bu ll an d th e of

fic er de ci de d to le av e th e in fan t at th e ho us e be cau se th e 2 in fan t was Oka ’s bi ol og ic al ch il d; th e two ol de r ch il dr en were f r o m W hi te Bu ll ’s
pr io r rel at io ns hi p an d a so ur ce of Oka ’s an ge r. Afte r Oka was arre st ed

, Ro se ret ur ne d
to th e h ou se to pi ck up th e in fan t.

-2

-W hi le in jail

, Oka se nt a le tt er to W hi te Bu ll th ro ug h a fel lo w in m at e. The le tt er

was in tro du ced at t ria l. It read :

Dear Ro se ,

I wan te d to te ll y ou th at if y ou do n’t writ e a st at em en t sa y in g y ou do n’t

wan t to pr es s ch arg es , o r co m e an d ta lk to th e pr os ecu to r an d dr op th e ch arg e on m e, I’m go in g to ge t i nd ic te d. I p le d n ot gu il ty. I’m go in g to tri al

. You be tt er co m e an d tal k to th e pr os ecu to r. I’m no t LYING!!! Or cal l [tr ib al de fen se at to rn ey ] Ji m Cern ey an d te ll hi m y ou ’re n ot go in g to sh ow up to m

y tri al

. I’ve go t a pr el im in ary he ari ng on Aug us t 31 st at 11 :0 0. Don ’t sh ow up to th at

. Tha t’s th e on ly way I'l l ge t ou t. I lo ve y ou

a n d I ’m s or ry

. I m is s y ou a lo t, an d I m is s Bab y [o m it te d]. ; I re a l l y

ne ed y ou r he lp wit h th is on e. If y ou lo ve m e, y ou ’ll do th is fo r m e. I fo rg iv e y ou

. I’m go in g craz y in he re!! ! So rry fo r arg ui ng wit h y ou

. Now I’m pa y in g for it

. I jus t want to ge t ou t and se e y ou gu y s. You gu y s are

m y worl d. I’m

ha pp y wit h y ou two . I kn ow I a ct craz y , bu t I t ru ly lov e y ou

. I st oo d by y ou r si de

, ne ve r ga ve up on y ou

. I jus t ne ed y ou to do th is fo r m e Bo o! ! W he n y ou ge t $ bu y m e so m e m in ut es so I can cal l. I f e e l l i k e it ’s th e en d of th e wor ld ! The se da y s go by sl ow. I can ’t s t o p th in ki ng of y ou an d m

y Bab y . C om e an d g e t me o u t . I t’ll be wor th it I
pr om is e y ou

. I’m on 3,0 00 .00 bo nd

. Thi s is m y li fe he re. Pl eas e do th is fo r m e. Here’s t he # t o c al l to bu y m e so m e m in ut es [n um be r omitt ed ]. My 5 di gi t pi n # is [p in om it te d]. Do th is be fo re th e Fed s co m e an d pi ck

m e u p! ! I’m ag ai ns t th e cl oc k he re. If y ou tru ly l ov e m e, y ou ’ll do th is fo r m e. I’ll b e wai ti ng . You rs tru ly. Lov e Ale x XOXOXO.

App el le e’s Add en du m at 2. In th e m arg in of th e le tt er, Oka wro te , “ I [ex pl et iv e] up

. 3

I’m so rry .” Id

.

The le tt er ha s be en ed it ed to refl ect co rre ct spe lling

, gr am m ar, an d pu nc tu at io n 3 wit ho ut alt eri ng it s s ub st an ce.

-3

-A fe de ral gr an d jury ret ur ne d an in di ct m en t ch arg in g Oka wit h dom es tic as sa ult by a h a b i tu al of

fen de r, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 11 7. The reaf te r, a su pe rs ed in g in di ct m en t was fil ed

, ad di ng an a d d i t i on al co un t ag ai ns t Oka fo r ta m pe rin g wit h a wit ne ss or vi ct im

, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 15 12 (b )(1 ), ba se d on th e le tt er to W hi te
Bu ll

.

Oka ’s cas e p ro ceed ed to tri al . At th e co nc lu si on of th e ev id en ce, Ok a m ov ed
f or a jud gm en t of acq ui tt al on bo th co un ts , arg ui ng th at th e go ve rn m en t fai le d t o
pr es en t su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to co nv ic t hi m on ei th er ch arg e. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed
th e m ot io n. The j ur y th en ret ur ne d gu il ty ve rd ic ts on bo th co un ts

. The di st ric t co ur t

se nt en ced Oka t o 4 7 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t an d t hr ee years’ su pe rv is ed rel eas e.

II. Dis cu ss io n Oka a p p e a l s b o th co nv ic ti on s on th e gr ou nd th at th e go ve rn m en t fai le d to

pr es en t su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to co nv ic t hi m

. W e rev ie w de no vo ch al le ng e s t o t he

su ffi ci en cy of th e ev id en ce. Uni te d St at es v. St

. Jo hn

, 7 1 6 F

. 3 d 4 9 1, 49 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (p er cu ria m ). “ Th[i s] st an da rd is ve ry st ric t

. . . .” Uni te d St at es v. Sa nt an a , 52 4
F.3 d 85 1, 85 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ). W e “ wil l affi rm th e jury’ s ve rd ic t if, ta ki ng al l fact s in
th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e ve rd ic t, a r e a s o na bl e juro r co ul d ha ve fo un d [Ok a]

gu il ty of th e ch arg ed co nd uc t be y on d a reas on ab le do ub t.” St

. Jo hn

, 71 6 F.3 d at 49 3 (in te rn al qu ot at io n om it te d)

. “ On th is rev ie w we do no t weig h th e ev id en ce or as se ss wit ne ss cred ib il it y be cau se th e jury ha s th e so le res po ns ib il it y to res ol ve co nf li ct s or

co nt rad ic ti on s i n t es ti m on y .” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n o m it te d)

.

Oka fir st as se rts t h a t th e go ve rn m en t di d no t pr es en t su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to

co nv ic t hi m fo r do m es ti c as sa ul t by a h a bi tu al of fen de r. Co nc ed in g th e ot he r el em en ts , Oka on ly co nt es ts whe th er th e go ve rn m en t pr ov ed th at he “ co m m it [te d] a do m es ti c as sa ul t.” 1 8 U.S.C. § 11 7( a).

-4

-The st at ut e do es no t defi ne “ as sa ul t.” But
, “ [w]here a fed eral cri m in al st at ut e

us es a co m

m on -la w te rm of es ta bl is he d m ea n in g wit ho ut ot he rwis e de fin in g it

, th e
g en eral pr act ic e is to gi ve th at te rm it s co m m on -la w m ean in g.” Uni te d St a t e s v

. Har la n , 8 15 F.3 d 11 00 , 1 10 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 1 6 ) ( q u o t i n g Uni te d St at es v. Tu rl ey , 3 52
U.S. 40 7, 4 11 (19 57 ) (i nt erp ret in g t he same sta tu te for it s d efi ni ti on of a ss au lt )).

Co m m o n l aw as sa ul t em

br aces two di ffer en t cri m es : (1 ) at te m pt ed ba tt ery, th at is

, an in te nd ed effo rt to cau se bo di ly ha rm to an ot he r whi ch fal ls sh or t of su cces s reg ard le ss of whe th er th e in te nd ed vi ct im kn ows of th e at te m

pt , an d (2 ) an y act whi ch is in te nd ed to , an d reas on ab ly do es , cau se th e vi c t im to fe ar im m ed ia te bo di ly ha rm ; su ch m en aci ng

co ns ti tu te s as sa ul t ev en if no ph y si cal ha rm is at te m pt e d

, a c hi ev ed

, or in te nd ed

.

Id . (cl ean ed up ).

The di st ric t co ur t’s jur y

in st ru ct io n d efi ne d a ss au lt for th e jury as fo ll ows :

An “ as sa ul t” as us ed in th es e in st ru ct io ns i s (1 ) an y in te nt io na l an d

vo lu nt ary at te m

pt or th reat to do in

jury to th e pe rs on of an ot he r, whe n

co up le d w i t h t h e ap pa ren t pr es en t ab il it y to do so su ffi ci en t to pu t th e pe rs o n a g a i ns t who m th e at te m pt is m ad e in fear of im m ed ia te bo di ly ha rm or (2 ) an y i n t e n t io na l or kn owi ng ha rm fu l or of fen si ve bo di ly
to uc hi ng or co nt act , ho wev er sl ig ht

, wit ho ut jus ti fic at io n or ex cu se , w it h

an o t he r’s pe rs on , reg ard le ss of whe th er ph y si cal ha rm is in te nd ed or in fli ct ed or whe th er th e vi ct im ha s reas on ab le ap pr eh en si on o f b o di ly ha rm

.

Fi na l Ju ry I n s t r s

. , In st r. No. 7 at 8, Uni te d St at es v. Oka

, No. 1: 17 -cr- 10 03 7- RAL (D.S.D. Feb . 23 , 20 18 ), ECF No. 5 2.

At tri al

, W hi te Bu ll te st ifi ed th at Oka ki ck ed he r in th e ba ck wit h en ou gh fo rce
to kn oc k th e win d ou t of he r, st ru ck he r o n t h e he ad

, th reat en ed he r, an d m ad e he r

-5

-afra id . Whi te Bu ll ’s s is te r co rro bo rat ed W hi te Bu ll ’s t es ti m on y . Th e si st er te st ifi ed

ab ou t a te xt m es sa ge sh e ha d recei ve d from W hi te Bu ll in whi ch W hi te Bu ll “ as ke d [h er s is te r] to ca ll th e po li ce” and sa id th at Oka was hu rti ng W hi te Bu ll

. Tria l Tr. at
68
, Uni te d St at es v. Oka

, No. 1: 17 -cr- 10 03 7- RAL (D.S.D. Ju ly 9, 20 18 ), ECF No. 81

. The go ve rn m en t al so p r e se nt ed po li ce ph ot og rap hs ta ke n of th e ab ras io n on W hi te
Bu ll ’s ba ck

. W e co nc lu de , bas ed on th es e fact s, a reas on ab le jury co ul d hav e fo un d
th at Oka ei th er “ in te nd ed

. . . to cau se bo di ly ha rm to ” W hi te Bu ll or “ in te nd ed to , an d

reas on ab ly d[ id ], cau se [Wh i t e Bu ll ] to fe ar im m ed ia te bo di ly ha rm .” Har la n , 81 5
F.3 d at 11 06 (in te rn al qu ot at io ns om it te d)

. The ev id en ce su ffi ci en tly es ta bl is he d fact s

en ab li ng th e jury to c on cl ud e Oka co m m it te d d om es ti c as sa ul t.

Oka ne xt arg ue s th at th e ev id en ce was in su ffi ci en t to co nv ic t hi m fo r ta m pe rin g wit h a vi ct im or wit ne ss un de r 18 U.S.C. § 15 12 (b )(1 ). Sect io n 15 12 (b )(1 ) pr os cri be s

“ kn owi ng ly us [in g] in ti m id at io n, th reat en [in g], or c o r r up tl y pe rs ua d[ in g] an ot he r
pe rs on , or at te m

pt [in g] to do so

. . . wit h in te nt to

. . . in flu en ce, de la y , or pr ev en t th e
te st im on y of an y pe rs on in an of fic ia l pr oc eed in g.” As refl ect ed by th e di st ric t co ur t’s
in st ru ct io n, th is cri m e ha s t w o e l e men ts : (1 ) “ th at th e de fen da nt , Alex an de r Ja m es Oka

, kn owi ng ly us ed co rru pt pe rs ua si on ag ai ns t Su nd an ce Ro se W hi te Bu ll ;” an d (2 )

“ th at th e de fen da nt di d so wit h in te nt to in flu en ce, de la y , or pr ev en t th e te st im on y of
Su nd an ce Ro se W hi te Bu ll at an of fic ia l pr oc eed in g.” Fi na l Ju ry In st rs ., In st r. No. 8

at 9. “ To co rru pt l y p e rs ua de so m eo ne m ean s to pe rs ua de wit h co ns ci ou sn es s of

wro ng do in g.” Id

. And a ct in g wit h an “ in te nt to in flu en ce” te st im on y m ean s act in g

“ fo r th e p u r p o s e o f g et ti ng th e pe rs on to ch an ge or co lo r or sh ad e he r te st im on y in

so m e way .” Id

.

Oka arg ue s th at he di d no t kn owi ng ly us e co rru pt pe rs ua si on be cau se hi s le tt er

“ di d no t as k W hi te Bu ll to ch an ge he r st or y ,” “ di d no t as k [Whit e Bu ll ] to li e,” “ di d

no t a c cu se [Whit e Bu ll ] of m ak in g a fal se al le ga ti on ag ai ns t hi m ,” an d “ di d no t th reat en W hi te Bu ll in an y way .” App el la nt ’s Br. at 8. Ok a o ve rlo ok s t ha t t he let te r

ex pl ic it ly as ke d W hi te Bu ll to no t sh ow up to a he ari ng , an d to te ll th e la wy ers on th e

-6

-cas e th at sh e wou ld be un av ai l a b l e f o r tri al

. Oka co nc ed es as m uc h in hi s br ie f,

st at in g th at “ th e le tt er si m pl y as ke d W hi te Bu ll to no t sh ow up at tri al .” Id

. at 9. Oka ’s

req ue st cl earl y co nv ey s th at Oka be li ev ed W hi te Bu ll ’s a b s e n ce wou ld be ne fit hi s de fen se an d i m

pa ir t he pro se cu ti on ’s cas e.

Tam pe rin g do es no t req ui re pr oo f th at W hi te Bu ll was act ua ll y in flu en ced by
Oka ’s act io ns

. Se e, e.g

. , Uni te d St at es v. Bern ha rd t , 90 3 F.3 d 81 8, 8 2 7 ( 8 t h C ir.
20 18 )

. Bas ed on a fai r read in g of Oka ’s le tt er, a reas on ab le jury co ul d ha ve fo un d th at Oka “ di d no t act with an in no cen t pu rp os e bu t wi th co ns ci ou sn es s o f wro ng do in g.”
Id

. In ot he r wor ds

, it was reas on ab le fo r a jury to co nc lu de th at Oka kn ew at te m pt in g
to pr ev en t th e te st im on y of th e pr im ary wit ne ss ag ai ns t hi m was wro ng fu l. The refo re

a reas on ab le jury co ul d fin d th at he us ed co rru pt pe rs ua si on ag ai ns t W hi te Bu ll “ wit h
in te nt to

. . . pr ev en t [h er] te st im on y .” Fi na l Ju ry In st rs ., Ju ry In s t r

. N o

. 8 at 9. The

go ve rn m en t pr es en te d su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to su pp or t Oka ’s co nv ic ti on of wit ne ss
ta m pe rin g.

III. Co nc lu si on The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-7

-