United States v. Sonny Crazymule

MEMORANDUM

Sonny Crazymule appeals his conviction for aiding and abetting assault in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1158 (a), 113(a)(6) and 2. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

1. Sufficient evidence supports Crazy-mule’s conviction. The prosecution presented evidence Crazymule was present at the scene of the crime on the night of the assault, called the victim out of the tent, goaded Eddie Widner into committing the assault, later told a relative he thought he “just killed somebody” and encouraged a friend of Widner’s to tell Widner to “take the fall” for the crime. After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by issuing a supplemental jury instruction because the instruction was not impermissibly coercive. “In assessing the coerciveness of a supplemental instruction, we look to the form of the jury charge, the period of deliberation following the charge, the total time of deliberation, and other…