United States v. Paul Oatman

Good Law
617 F. App'x 788
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 22, 201514-30194California418 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Paul Oatman appeals his jury conviction and sentence for assault resulting in serious bodily injury under 18 U.S.C. §§ 113 (a)(6) and 1153. Oatman’s conviction and sentence followed an incident that occurred on an Indian reservation in which Oatman allegedly struck an officer and fractured his jaw. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in’ part and vacate and remand in part.

We review de novo the district court’s denial of Oatman’s Rule 29 motion, and conclude the district court did not err. See United States v. Acosta-Sierra, 690 F.3d 1111, 1117 (9th Cir.2012); Fed. R.Crim.P. 29(a). Viewing the evidence and the inferences that may be drawn from it in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Oatman intentionally assaulted Gaston, causing Gaston’s serious bodily injury. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).

We review de novo the district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines, and we review for abuse of discretion its application of the six-level official victim enhancement. See United States v. Loew, 593 F.3d…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.