Source: https://rockymountaindefense.com/2016/09/23/plain-error-found-in-failure-to-instruct-jury-that-assault-is-an-element-of-every-conviction-under-18-u-s-c-%C2%A7-111a1/
Timestamp: 2018-04-20 01:10:53
Document Index: 770017598

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 111', '§ 111', '§ 111', '§ 111', '§ 111', '§ 111', '§ 1']

Plain Error Found in Failure to Instruct Jury That Assault is an Element of Every Conviction Under 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1) – Federal Public Defender
On appeal, Wolfname argued that the district court failed to instruct the jury on assault as an element of resisting and interfering with an officer under § 111(a)(1). The Tenth Circuit had previously addressed the issue in United States v. Hathaway, 318 F.3d 1001 (10th Cir. 2003). In Hathaway, it held that § 111(a) proscribes two separate offenses—a misdemeanor offense and a felony offense. The Tenth Circuit then held that both offenses require that the government prove assault when it alleges a defendant violated § 111(a)(1). Since a § 111(a)(1) conviction for resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidating, or interfering must fall into one of the offense categories, a conviction for any of these acts necessarily involves—at a minimum—simple assault. Therefore, assault is an element of any § 111(a)(1) conviction under Hathaway.
The district court’s failure to instruct the jury on the essential element of assault constituted plain error and the plain error affected Wolfname’s substantial rights and the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of his trial, therefore his conviction was reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Previous Previous post: Tenth Circuit Finds Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction § 1.31 Erroneous