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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 15 52

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
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.

Terry L. Harlan

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 Ne br as ka - Om ah a

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 20 , 20 15 Fil ed : Fe br

ua ry 16 , 20 16

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , BEAM an d KELLY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ RILEY, Chi ef J ud ge

.

A jury fo un d Te r r y Lee Harl an , a Nati ve Am eri can m an , gu il ty of do m es ti c

as sa ul t in In di an co un try by an ha bi tu al of fen de r in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 11 7. Thedi st ric t co ur t se nt en ced Harl an to 41 m on th s i mp r i so nm en t. Harl an ap pe al s hi s 1

co nv ic ti on an d s en te nc e. W it h ju ris di ct io n u nd er 2 8 U.S.C. § 12 91 , we affi rm

.

I. BACKGRO UND 2
Harl an li ve d wit h hi s gi rlf rie nd Mar le ne Free m on t, a Nati ve Am eri can wom an , in hi s t rai le r ho m e o n t he Om ah a In di an Res erv at io n. Free m on t m ov ed ou t fo r two week s earl y in 20 14 an d sp en t so m e ti m e wit h a n o t h e r man

. W he n Harl an an d
Free m on t go t ba ck to ge th er in Mar ch
, Free m on t li ed ab ou t se e i n g an ot he r m an fo r fear Harl an wou ld hi t he r. Harl an , who earl ie r ha d se en Free m on t wit h th e m an , go t

m ad ab ou t th e li e an d h it th e win ds hi el d o f th e car he an d F reem on t wer e si tt in g i n.

On Mar ch 6, 20 14
, th e ev en in g Free m on t ret ur ne d, sh e an d Harl an dr an k be er
to ge th er an d Free m on t, a lo ng -ti me m et ha m ph et am in e us er, go t hi gh

. Harl an

ev en tu al ly wen t to be d, bu t Freem on t st ay ed up al l ni gh t dr in ki ng be er in to th e ne xt da y

. Harl an st ay ed so be r fo r a whi le th e ne xt da y , bu t be ga n dr in ki ng wit h Free m on t

ag ai n in th e ev en in g. Bo th were dr un k by 8: 00 p.m ., an d Free m on t was st il l hi gh on

m et h fr om

th e d ay be fo re.

Harl an ’s si st er, And rea Harl an , an d Harl an ’s th irt een -y ear- ol d da ug ht er, K.H., joi ne d th e co up le at th e tra il er la te r th at ni gh t. Harl an an d Free m on t ad jou rn ed to th e be dr oo m to ke ep dr i n k i ng an d watc h te le vi si on

. Harl an go t m ad whe n Free m on t

m en t i o n ed th e ot he r m an sh e da te d an d pu sh ed Free m on t in to th e cl os et wit h bo th
ha nd s. Des pi te Free m on t’s p le as for Harl an to st op , he g rab be d h er b y th e h ai r an d

st ru ck he r face a n d h e a d a bo ut ei gh t ti m es

. Free m on t fel l to th e flo or , an d Harl an ki ck ed he r bo dy twice

.

The Hon or ab le Ly le E. St ro m , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct of 1 Neb ras ka

.

“ W e pr es en t th e fact s in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e jury’ s ve rd ic t.” Uni te d 2 St at es v. Fu ll er, 5 57 F.3d 85 9, 8 62 (8t h C ir. 2 00 9)

.
-2

-W he n Harl an st op pe d, Free m on t reac he d fo r he r sh oe s an d swe at er so sh e

co ul d le av e, bu t Harl an to ss ed th em as id e an d be ga n hi tt in g he r ag ai n, as ki ng whe th er sh e in te nd ed to se e an ot he r m an

. Harl an th en or de red Free m on t to la y on th ei r be d
whi le he wen t to sl eep

. Afte r Harl an pa ss ed ou t, Free m on t le ft th e tra il er to rep or t th e be at in g to th e po li ce. On he r way ou t, Free m on t as ke d And rea if sh e h a d se en Free m on t’s swe at er. Sh e ha d no t, so , de sp it e th e co ld weat h e r , F r e e m on t le ft th e
tra il er weari ng on ly a sh or t-s le ev ed sh irt an d swe at pa nt s. As sh e le ft, Free m on t to ld
And rea t o t el l Har la n t ha t Fr eem on t was go in g t o re po rt wh at Harl an ha d d on e.

No on e was at th e po li ce st at io n whe n Free m on t arri ve d. Sh e was ab le to fla g do wn an of

fic er fro m a ne arb y to wn who co nt act ed Om ah a Nati on Law Enfo rcem en t
Serv ic es , t he de pa rtment wit h juri sd ic ti on ov er as sa ul ts be twee n Nati ve Am eri can s

on th e res erv at io n. Offi cer W il li am W eb st er res po nd ed an d to ok Free m on t’s

st at em en t an d ex am in ed h e r i nju rie s. Offi cer W eb st er cal le d an am bu la nc e so a

m em be r of th e res cu e sq ua d co ul d ev al u a t e F reem on t’s in juri es an d arra ng ed fo r Free m on t t o s pe nd th e n ig ht in jail to sl eep off he r su bs ta nt ia l i nt ox ic at io n.

Afte r he r rel eas e earl y th e ne xt m or ni ng , Free m on t so ug ht tre at m en t at In di an Heal th Serv ic es Hos pi ta l in W in ne ba go , Neb ras ka
, rep or ti ng sh e ha d be en as sa ul te d.
Ph y si ci an as si st an t Car m el Berg li n, who ha s ex te ns iv e ex pe rie nc e tre at in g as sa ul t vi ct im s, exam in ed Free m on t. Free m on t to ld Berg li n th at Harl an pu nc he d her in th e face an d c he st an d g rab be d h er ri gh t ar m

.

Berg li n ob se rv ed m

ult iple co nt us io ns , in cl ud in g a br ui se ov er Free m on t’s rig ht
ch eek bo ne , an d te nd ern es s on Free m on t’s face an d he ad

. Berg li n al so no te d a la rg e

co nt us io n on Free m on t’s fo rear m , a br ui se on he r ch es t, an d te nd ern es s al on g he r rib s.

-3

-Afte r th e as sa ul t, Free m on t st ay ed wit h he r m ot he r. W he n Free m on t di d ret ur n

to th e tra il er to see Harl an , he to ld he r he was so rry an d wou ld no t hi t he r ag ai n, bu t th ere was no th in g h e co ul d d o a bo ut what he ha d d on e.

On Ju ne 18
, 20 14
, a gr an d jury ch arg ed Harl an wit h do m es ti c as sa ul t in In di an

co un try by an ha bi tu al of fen de r. See 18 U.S.C. § 11 7. The in di ct m en t ch arg ed th at Harl an ha d m

ul ti pl e pr io r co nv ic ti on s fo r d o m es ti c as sa ul t, in cl ud in g, as rel ev an t he re, a 20 02 tri ba l-c ou rt co nv ic ti on fo r si m pl e as sa ul t an d a 20 03 fed eral co nv ic ti on f o r as sa ul t res ul ti ng in se rio us bo di ly in jury. On Octo be r 27
, 20 14
, Harl a n f i l e d a

m ot io n in li m in e ch al le ng in g th e ad m is si bi li ty of hi s 20 02 tri ba l-c ou rt co nv i c t io n. 3

H a r l a n arg ue d th e pr io r co nv ic ti on was fo r at te m pt , no t as sa ul t. The di st ric t c o u r t de ni ed th e m ot io n.

Harl an ’s jury tri al be ga n on Nov em be r 17
, 20 14

. The go ve rn m en t fir st cal le d
Free m on t, who d e s c r i be d th e as sa ul t in vi vi d de ta il

. Berg li n te st ifi ed Free m on t’s
in juri es were en ti rel y co ns is te nt wit h he r de sc rip ti on of th e as sa ul t

. On cro ss

ex am in at io n, Berg li n op in ed so m e—b ut no t al l— of Free m on t’s inju rie s cou ld ha ve

res ul te d fr om

a fal l.

I n s up po rt of hi s m ot io n in li m in e, Harl an en te red in to th e reco rd Om ah a 3 Trib al Co de § 5- 4- 4( a) (2 01 3) , whi ch st at es , i n rel ev an t pa rt, “ A p ers on is gu il ty o f si m pl e as sa u l t i f h e

. . . at te m pt s to cau se or pu rp os el y , kn owi ng ly, or reck le ss ly

cau se s bo di ly in

jury to an ot he r; or

. . . at te m pt s by a sh ow of fo rce or vi ol en ce to pu t

an ot he r in fear of im m in en t se rio us bo di ly in jury.” W he n as ke d at or al arg um en t why th e rec or d d id no t i nc lu de th e 2 00 2 v ers io n o f th e tr ib al st at ut e u nd er wh ic h Har la n pl ed gu il ty, Harl an ex pl ai ne d th e Trib al Co de was rev is ed in 20 03 an d he was un ab le
t o fin d th e 20 02 ve rs io n. Rel y in g on th e al ig nm en t be twee n th e la ng ua ge in th e ch arg in g do cu m en ts an d th e cu rren t ve rs io n of § 5- 4- 4, Harl an m ai nt ai ns th e st at ut es

were re nu m

be red bu t t he ele m en ts of s im pl e as sa ul t d id no t ch an ge

. W e acce pt th e pa rti es ’ us e o f th e rec or d v ers io n.

-4

-The go ve rn m en t ne xt ca lle d Freem on t’s si st er Deli la h Free m on t (Del il ah ), who

ha d an in ti m at e rel at io ns hi p wit h Harl an m or e th an a de cad e earl ie r. W hi le th ey were
to ge th er, Harl an as sa ul te d Deli la h m ul ti pl e ti m es

. Ove r Harl an ’s ren ewed ob jecti on , th e di st ric t co ur t ad m it te d th ree ex hi bi ts sh owi ng two of Harl a n ’s pr io r as sa ul t

co nv ic ti on s. Exh ib it s 1 an d 2 de sc rib ed Harl an ’s 20 03 fed eral co nv ic ti on fo r

as sa ul ti ng Deli la h an d cau si ng se rio us bo di ly in jury. Exh ib it 3 do cu m en te d Harl an ’s
20 02 tri ba l-c ou rt co nv ic ti on fo r si m pl e as s a u lt on Deli la h. Afte r br ie fly
ack no wled gi ng he r pa st rel at io ns hi p wit h Harl an , Deli la h st at ed th at a week aft er th e

as sa ul t on Fre em on t, Deli la h ob se rv ed in juri es on Free m on t co ns is te nt wit h
Free m on t’s d es cri pt io n o f th e as sa ul t.

Harl an ’s si st er And rea te st ifi ed th at on th e ni gh t of th e ch arg ed as sa ul t, sh e
ret ur ne d to th e tra il er whe re sh e li ve d wit h Harl an an d Free m on t. And rea st at ed sh e

an d K.H. wat ch ed te le vi si on in th e li vi ng roo m when Harl an an d Free m on t wen t to th e be dr oo m

. Bo th Harl an an d Free m on t were dr in ki ng al co ho l, an d Harl an ne ed ed
he lp to th e be dr oo m be cau se he was ph y si cal ly im pa ire d by th e al co ho l. And rea so on he ard arg ui ng

. W he n sh e wen t to th e be dr oo m to in ve st ig at e, And rea le arn ed Harl an

was m ad be cau se Free m on t wo ul d n ot go to be d a nd let hi m sl eep

.

And rea de ni ed he ari ng an y th in g su gg es ti ng a p h ysi cal st ru gg le
, as sa ul t, or

so m eo ne fal li ng do wn. And rea te st ifi ed Free m on t l a t e r cam e ou t of th e be dr oo m

as ki ng fo r a swe at er, bu t le ft wit ho ut on e whe n And rea to ld he r sh e di d no t ha ve on e. And rea d id no t no ti ce any bl eed in g o r ot he r si gn s o f a fi gh t wh en Free m on t l eft th e
tra il er an d te s t i fie d Free m on t di d no t m en ti on an y in juri es an d di d no t as k fo r an y he lp

. Free m on t di d no t ret ur n, bu t th e po li ce arri ve d th irt y to for ty m in ut es la te r to in ve st ig at e.

K.H. te st ifi ed ne xt

. K.H. ob se rv ed Harl an an d Free m on t dr in ki ng an d ta lk in g
at th e ki tc he n tab le th e n ig ht of t he ass au lt . Sho rtl y aft er K.H. hel pe d Har la n t o t he
be dr oo m , K.H. he ard y el li ng a n d wen t to th e be dr oo m to se e wha t was ha pp en in g.

-5

-K

. H

. a s k e d H arl an , who ap pe ared to be m ad
, why he was y el li ng , an d he rep li ed

Free m on t wo ul d n ot let hi m sl eep

.

K.H. m ad e at le as t two or th ree tri ps to th e be dr oo m to in ve st ig at e th e y el li ng

. At on e po in t, K.H. ob se rv ed Harl an si tt in g on th e be d wit h Free m on t st an di ng ne arb y

. W he n Harl an m ov ed
, Free m on t rai se d he r ha nd s to de fen d he rs el f. K.H. as ke d why
sh e rea ct ed th at way , and Free m on t re pl ie d s he th ou gh t Har la n was go in g to hi t h er

as he ha d be fo re. K.H. ne ve r sa w a ph y si cal al te rcat io n be twee n Harl an an d Free m on t

an d di d no t he ar a n yo n e f a ll in g do wn. K.H. di d ob se rv e Free m on t crying
, bu t
F r e e mo n t e x pl ai ne d sh e was sa d ab ou t a fri en d who di ed

. K.H. di d no t th in k
Free m on t lo ok ed li ke sh e was hu rt. Lik e And rea, K.H. reca ll ed Free m on t la te r as ki ng fo r a swe at er an d le av in g th e tra il er wit ho ut a swe at er ev en th ou gh it was co ld

. K.H.

st at ed th e p ol ic e arr iv ed ab ou t t hi rty m in ut es aft er Fre em on t l eft

.

Offi cer W eb st er te st ifi ed he to ok a rep or t fro m Free m o n t t h e ni gh t of th e

as sa ul t. Rec al li ng Free m on t was no t dr es se d ap pr op ria te ly fo r th e co ld weat he r th at ni gh t, Offi cer W eb st er te st ifi ed sh e ap pe ared to be in to xi cat ed an d afra id

. Free m on t

to ld Offi cer W eb st er th at Harl an ha d as sa ul te d he r, an d sh owe d hi m th e in juri es to he r rig ht ch eek an d fore he ad

. Afte r ta ki ng Free m on t to jail an d arra ng in g fo r a m ed ic al

ev al ua ti on , Offi cer W eb st er wen t to Harl an ’s tra i l er. Vis ib ly in to xi cat ed
, Harl an de ni ed ha vi ng a ph y si cal al te rcat io n wit h Free m on t, an d Offi cer W eb st er di d no t se e

an y m ark s on Harl an ’s ha nd s. Offi cer W eb st er arre st ed Harl an , who ne ed ed

as si st an ce t o wal k t o t he sq ua d c ar.

The go ve rn m en t en te red cert ai n fact ua l st ip ul at io ns ab ou t Harl an ’s pr io r

co nv ic ti on s an d hi s tra il er’s lo cat io n in In di an co un try be fo re res ti ng it s cas e. Harl an di d no t tes ti fy or cal l any wit ne ss es

. On Nov em be r 19
, 20 14
, th e jury fo un d Harla n
gu il ty.

-6

-Befo re se nt en c i ng , Harl an m ov ed fo r a se nt en ce be lo w th e ad vi so ry Uni te d

St at es Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s (Gu id el in es ) ran ge ba se d on hi s po or ph y si cal he al th

. 4
The go ve rn m en t res is te d th e m ot io n, hi gh li gh ti ng Harl an ’s hi st or y of as sa ul ti ve

co nd uc t an d ob se rv in g hi s he al th pr ob le m s di d no t pr ev en t hi m f r o m ge tt in g dr un k

an d a ss au lt in g F reem on t.

Afte r rev ie win g Harl an ’s br ie f an d he ari ng th e pa rti es ’ arg um en ts , th e di st ric t

co ur t de ni ed Harl an ’s m ot io n. Trou bl ed by Harl an ’s fai lu re to acce pt res po ns ib il it y fo r th e as sa ul t an d hi s la ck of rem or s e fo r hu rti ng Free m on t, th e di st ric t co ur t

se nt en ced Harl an to 41 m on th s— th e bo tt om of th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s ran ge

. Harl an
ap pe al s, ch al le ng in g t he ad m is si on of h is tri ba l-c ou rt c on vi ct io n, t he su ffi ci en cy of
th e ev id en ce, an d h is sen te nc e.

II

. DISCUSS IO N
A. Ha rl an ’s Tri ba l-Co urt Co nv ic tio n Sect io n 1 17 (a)( 1) pro vi de s i n re le va nt pa rt,

Any pe rs on who co m

m it s a d om es ti c as sa ul t wi th in

. . . In di an co un try

an d who ha s a fin al co nv ic ti on on at le as t 2 se pa rat e pr io r oc cas io ns in Fed eral
, St at e, or In di an tri ba l co ur t pr oc eed in gs fo r of fen se s th at wou ld be
, if su bjec t to Fed eral juri sd ic ti on

. . . an y as sa ul t , se xu al ab us e, or

se rio us vi ol en t fel on y ag ai ns t a sp o u s e o r in ti m at e pa rtn er

. . . s ha ll be fin ed un de r th is ti tl e, im

pr is on ed fo r a te rm of no t m or e th an 5 y ears , or bo th

.
(Em ph as is ad de d)

. Ove r Harl an ’s ob jecti on , th e di st ric t co ur t ad m it te d ev id en ce th at in 20 02
, Harl an pl ed gu il ty in tri ba l co ur t t o a s s a ul ti ng Deli la h in In di an co un try

Harl an su ffer s fro m a nu m be r of he al th pr ob le m s, in cl ud in g d i ab et es , 4 hypert en si on , en d- st ag e ren al di se as e, co ro na ry art ery di se as e , c o ng es ti ve he art fai lu re, cereb ral pa ls y , an d ane m ia ch ro ni c di se as e. He ne ed s di al y si s sev eral ti m es pe r week an d t ak es a lo ng li st of m ed ic at io ns

.
-7

-whi le th ey were in an in ti m at e rel at io ns hi p. The di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de d th e ph ras e

“ an y as sa ul t” in § 11 7( a)(1 ) un qu es ti o na bl y in cl ud ed Harl an ’s si m pl e-as sa ul t

co nv ic ti on un de r th e tri ba l cod e. Harl an arg ue s th e di st ric t cou rt e rred in ad m it ti ng hi s 20 02 tri ba l-c ou r t c o n v i ct io n ba se d on an erro ne ou s in te rp ret at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 1 17 (a)( 1)

. 5

W e rev ie w de no vo is su es of st at ut or y in te rp ret at io n. See, e.g ., Uni te d St at es

v. W oo da rd
, 69 4 F.3 d 95 0, 95 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ); Uni te d St at es v. Bo az, 55 8 F.3 d 80 0,
80 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). “ W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s ev id en ti ary ru li ng s, in cl ud in g it s

ru li ng s on m ot io ns in li m in e, fo r an ab us e of di sc ret io n.” Uni te d St at es v. Pari sh
, 60 6
F.3 d 4 80 , 48 6 (8 th Cir . 20 10 ).

Harl an co nt en ds th e di st ric t cou rt abu se d it s di sc ret io n in de nyin g hi s m ot io n in li m in e an d ad m it ti ng ev id en ce of hi s 20 02 si m pl e-as sa ul t co nv ic ti on as a pr ed ic at e of fen se fo r § 11 7( a)(1 ) be cau se , in Ha r l a n ’s vi ew, a cl os er ex am in at io n of th e ch arg in g do cu m en ts rev eal s Harl an pl ed gu il ty to a ch arg e of “ Att em pt an d no t [act ua l] Ass au lt .” Po in ti ng to la ng ua ge i n t h e c r i m in al co m pl ai nt st at in g he

“ at te m pt [ed ] to cau se bo di ly in jury” to Deli la h Free m on t, Harl an as se rts “ pr io r

co nv ic ti on s fo r Att em

pt can no t be us ed as pr ed ic at e of fen se s to fu lfi ll th e ne ces sa ry el em en ts to pr ov e a vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 11 7.” Harl an m is un de rs ta nd s th e na tu re of cri m in al ass au lt

.

On Decem

be r 14
, 20 15
, th e Uni te d St at es Su pr em e Co ur t gr an te d cert io rari to 5

co ns id er “ whe th er rel ia nc e on va li d un co un se le d t r i b al -co ur t m is de m ean or

co nv ic ti on s to pr ov e Sect io n 11 7( a)’s pr ed i c at e-o ffen se el em en t vi ol at es th e Co ns ti tu ti on .” See Uni te d St at es v. Bryant
, 76 9 F.3d 67 1, 67 3 (9 th Ci r. 20 14 ), cert

. gr an te d, No. 15 -4 20
, 20 15 W L 58 22 18 6 (U.S. Dec. 14
, 20 15 ). W e ha ve he ld it do es

n o t

. S e e Uni te d St at es v. Cav an au gh
, 64 3 F.3 d 59 2, 59 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ); acco rd Uni te d St at es v. Sh av an au x, 64 7 F.3 d 99 3, 99 8 (10 th Ci r. 20 11 ). The Nin th Ci rcu it

rece nt ly de ci de d it do es

. See Bryant
, 76 9 F.3 d at 67 3. Tha t is su e i s no t be fo re us be cau se Harl an di d n ot rai se th e is su e o n a pp eal

.
-8

-In co ns tru in g § 11 7( a), we st art wit h “ th e la ng ua ge e mp l o y ed by Co ng res s.”

Rei te r v. So no to ne Co rp ., 44 2 U.S. 33 0, 3 3 7 ( 1 9 7 9 )

. Neit he r § 11 7 no r an y ot he r
pr ov is io n of th e ch ap te r whe re § 11 7 r e s i d e s de fin es th e te rm “ as sa ul t.” See
18 U.S

. C

. c h

. 7

. “ [W] he re 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 ean in g wit ho ut ot he rwis e de fin in g it
, th e ge ne ral 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 at es v. Turl ey , 35 2 U.S. 40 7, 41 1 (1 95 7)

.

“ ‘Com m on law as sa ul t em br aces two di ffer en t crim es : [(1 )] atte m pt ed ba tt ery, th at is
, an in te nd ed e f

f o r t t o 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 ct 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 ca l ha rm is at te m pt ed
, ach ie ve d, or in te nd ed .” Uni te d St at es v. Ols on , 64 6 F.3 d 56 9, 57 3- 74 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (al te rat io n o m it te d) (qu ot in g Un it ed Sta te s v . Lee, 19 9 F.3d 16
, 18 (1 st Cir . 19 99 )).

T he of fe nse unde rl y ing H ar la

n’ s 2002 tr iba l- cour t co nv ic ti on fo r si m ple- as sa ult
read il y fit s th e fir st pa rt of th e co m m on -la w def

in it io n. Se e And ers on v. Cr awfo rd
, 26 5 F. 50 4, 50 7 (8 th Ci r. 19 20 ) (“ W hi le a ba tt ery al way s in cl ud ed an as sa ul t, as sa ul ts of te n fal l sh or t of a ba tt ery. An as sa ul t is an at te m pt , whi ch
, if co ns um m at ed
, wou ld

res ul t in a ba tt ery. ”). The di st ric t co ur t di d no t e r r i n d e n yi n g Harl an ’s m ot io n in
li m in e an d in al lo win g th e go ve rn m en t to us e hi s si m pl e-as sa ul t co nv ic ti on as a
pr ed ic at e o ffen se un de r § 1 17 (a).

B. Suff

ic ie ncy of t he Ev id ence Harl an ne xt co nt en ds th e ev id en ce was in co ns is te nt an d in su ffi ci en t to co nv ic t hi m of as sa ul ti ng Free m on t in vi ol at io n 18 U.S.C. § 11 7. Que st io ni ng Free m on t’s

pe rcep ti on , m em or y , an d cred ib il it y , Harl an em ph as iz es (1 ) Free m on t was un de r th e in flu en c e of dr ug s an d al co ho l; (2 ) Berg li n te st ifi ed so m e of Free m on t’s in juri es
po ss ib ly co ul d hav e co m e fro m a fal l; (3 ) Harl an was “ dr un k an d di sa bl ed ” an d had

no m ark s on hi s ha nd s; an d (4 ) And rea an d K.H. di d no t se e th e as sa ul t or an y in juri es be fo re Free m on t le ft th e tra il er. Acco rd in g to Harl an , “ [s ]uch fact s co ul d eas il y le ad

-9

-a reas on ab le jury to co nc lu de t h a t t h e in juri es [Fre em on t] su st ai ne d were du e to

m ul ti pl e fal ls in to fix ed
, ha rd ob jects
, as op po se d to th e res ul t of an as sa ul t co m m it te d by Harlan .”

Tha t m ay be tru e, bu t i t i s n ot th e p ro pe r in qu iry on ap pe al

. The qu es ti on we

m us t an swe r is no t w he th er th e jury co ul d ha ve reas on ab ly de ci de d th e cas e di ffer en tl y , bu t whe th er “ no reas on ab le jury co ul d ha ve fo un d [Harl an ] gu il ty be y on d

a reas on ab le do ub t.” Uni te d St at es v. Carl so n, 78 7 F.3 d 93 9, 94 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ). In
de ci di ng th at qu es ti on , we vi ew th e “ ev id en ce in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e jury’ s

ve rd ic t, res ol v[ e] co nf

li ct s i n th e go ve rn m en t’s fav or , an d acce pt [] al l reas on ab le
in fere nc es th at su pp or t th e ve rd ic t.” Uni te d Stat es v. Du nn , 72 3 F.3d 91 9, 92 4 (8t h
Ci r. 20 13 ). “ W e do no t weig h th e ev id en ce or th e cred ib il it y of th e wi tn es se s.”
Uni te d St at es v. Hon arv ar, 47 7 F.3 d 99 9, 10 00 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ). “ [T]he jury ha s so le

res po ns i b i l i ty fo r res ol vi ng co nf li ct s or co nt rad ic ti on s in te st im on y , an d we m us t

res ol ve cred ib il it y is su es in fav or of th e ve rd ic t.” Uni te d St at es v. Sp ears , 45 4 F.3 d
83 0, 8 32 (8t h C ir. 2 00 6)

.

In th at li gh t, th e ev id en ce ad du ced at tri al was m or e th an su ffi ci en t to su pp or t th e jury’ s g ui lt y

ve rd ic t. Des pi te he r in to xi cat io n, Freem on t pro vi de d t he jury wit h

a de ta il ed acco un t of th e al te rcat io n sh e ha d wit h Harl an , th e be at in g he ga ve he r, an d
th e in juri es he in fli ct ed

. Leav i n g t h e tra il er whe n Harl an fel l as le ep , Free m on t

pr om pt ly rep or te d th e as sa ul t to Offi cer Web st er, who te st ifi ed Free m on t ap pe ared

to be afra id

. Offi cer W eb st er ve rif ie d Free m on t’s rep or te d in juri es an d in ve st ig at ed
th e as sa ul t. As so on as sh e co ul d, Free m on t so ug ht tre at m en t at th e ho sp it al

. Berg li n
te st ifi ed Free m on t’s in

juri es to he r he ad
, face
, ch es t, rib s, an d arm were en ti rel y

co ns is te nt wit h Free m on t’s rep or t th at Harl an pu nc he d he r ab ou t ei gh t ti m es , gr ab be d
he r rig ht arm , an d ki ck ed he r whi le sh e was do wn. Alt ho ug h no on e el se wit ne ss ed

t h e act ua l as sa ul t, te st im on y fro m And rea an d K.H. al so bo ls te red Free m on t’s

acco un t. Bo th And rea a nd K.H. heard Harl an y el li ng at Free m on t for a lo ng pe rio d
of ti m e. K.H., w ho went ba ck to th e b ed ro om sev eral ti m es to in ve st ig at e, te st ifi ed

-1 0-th at whe n Harl an m ov ed
, Free m on t rai se d he r ha nd s to de fen d he rs el f, ex pl ai ni ng sh e

was afra id Harl an wou ld hi t he r ag ai n. I t w a s r e a s o na bl e fo r th e jury to cred it
Free m on t’s co rro bo rat ed tes ti m on y an d fi nd Harl an gu il ty of do m es ti c as sa ul t.

C. Subs ta nti ve Reas on ab le nes s Harl an la st arg ue s h i s se nt en ce was su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le be cau se th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t va ry do wnwar d “ fro m th e ad vi so ry gu id el in es ran ge fo r Harl an ’s

va rio us se rio us he al th pr ob l e ms

. ” W e rev ie w th e su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss of a

se nt en ce for abu se of di sc ret io n. See Gall v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2 U.S. 38
, 51 (2 00 7)

.

“ A di st ric t co ur t ab us es it s di sc ret io n an d im po se s an un reas on ab le se nt en ce whe n it
fai ls to co ns id er a rel ev an t an d s i g n i fic an t fact or , gi ve s si gn ifi can t weig ht to an irr el ev an t or im

pr op er fact or , or co ns id ers th e ap pr op ria te fact or s bu t co m m it s a cl ear

erro r of jud gm en t in weig hi ng th os e fact or s.” Uni te d St at es v. Mi ne r, 54 4 F.3 d 93 0,
93 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ). Harl an ’s wit hi n- Gui de li ne s se nt en c e i s pr es um pt iv el y

reas on ab le . See Gal l, 5 52 U.S. at 5 1. Harl an fai ls to reb ut th at pre su m pt io n.

Harl an ack no wled ge s th e di st ric t co ur t co ns id ered hi s m y ria d he al th pr ob le m s in im p o s i n g hi s se nt en ce, bu t co m pl ai ns th e di st ric t co ur t sh ou ld ha ve gi ve n m or e weig ht to th at fact or

. “ The fact th e di st r i c t c o ur t di d no t gi ve [Harl an ’s he al th

p r o b l em s] as m

uc h ‘w ei gh t’ as [Harl an ] wou ld ha ve pr efer red do es no t jus ti fy

rev ers al .” Uni te d St at es v. Bri dg es , 56 9 F.3 d 37 4, 37 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). “ The di st ric t

co ur t h a s w i d e l a ti tu de to weig h th e [1 8 U.S.C.] § 35 53 (a) fact or s in each cas e an d

as si gn so m e fact or s gr eat er weig ht th an ot he rs in de te rm i n i n g an ap pr op ria te

se nt en ce.” Id

.

Here, th e di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced Harl an at th e bo tt om of th e Gui de li ne s ran ge aft er co ns id eri ng v a r i o u s fact or s su ch as Harl an ’s he al th
, hi s hi st or y of cri m in al

as sa ul t, th e se rio us ne ss of do m es ti c vi ol en ce, Harl an ’s fai lu re to acce pt res po ns ib il it y fo r hi s act io ns , an d hi s la ck of rem or se fo r ha rm in g Free m on t. “ ‘[T] he co ur t care fu ll y

ex pl ai ne d th e rea so ns for it s s en te nc e an d i ts refu sa l t o v ary do wnwar d, an d we se e

-1 1-no in di cat io n t h a t th e co ur t im pr op erl y weig he d th e se nt en ci ng fact or s.’” Uni te d
St at es v. W an na , 74 4 F.3 d 58 4, 58 9 (8 th C i r. 20 14 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Von
Cru tc he r, 52 9 F. App ’x 80 2, 80 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (u np ub li sh ed pe r cu ria m )). Harl an ’s

se nt en ce i s s ub st an ti ve ly reaso na bl e.

II I. CONCLUSI ON
W e aff irm Harl an ’s con vi ct io n a nd sen te nc e.

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

-1 2-