United States v. John Abell

MEMORANDUM

John Abell appeals his jury conviction for attempted coercion and enticement of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422 (b).

1.The district court did not abuse its discretion when, in response to a jury inquiry, the court informed the jury it did not need to unanimously agree as to which of Abell’s actions constituted a substantial step. The district court correctly interpreted our holding in United States v. Hofus, 598 F.3d 1171, 1176 (9th Cir.2010), in a manner that fulfilled its “obligation, when a jury requests clarification on an issue, to clear away confusion with concrete accuracy.” United States v. McIver, 186 F.3d 1119, 1130 (9th Cir.1999) (quotation omitted), overruled on other grounds as recognized by United States v. Pineda-Moreno, 688 F.3d 1087, 1091 (9th Cir.2012). Further, although the district court originally instructed the jury it needed to unanimously agree on a substantial step— based on jointly-stipulated jury instructions taken from an outdated version of our model instructions — Abell has failed to show prejudice. The response appropriately clarified confusion. There was no abuse of discretion.

2. The government did not commit prosecutorial…