United States v. Daniel Crape

MEMORANDUM

Following a jury trial, Appellant Daniel Crape was convicted for stealing a government-owned border-monitoring sensor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 . Crape appeals his conviction on three grounds. We affirm.

Jury Instructions

First, Crape argues that the district court erroneously rejected two of his proposed jury instructions: 1) an instruction that a conviction under § 641 requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew the stolen property belonged to the United States, and 2) an instruction on Crape’s good faith defense. Both arguments fail.

The district court correctly instructed the jury on knowledge. “The reason for including the requirement [in § 641] that the property, in fact, belongs to the Government was to state the foundation for federal jurisdiction. A defendant’s knowledge of the jurisdictional fact is irrelevant....” United States v. Howey, 427 F.2d 1017, 1018 (9th Cir.1970). Accordingly, the district court did not err when it refused to instruct the jury that Crape could only be convicted if he knew the border-monitoring sensor belonged to the United States.

The Supreme Court’s reasoning in Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 556…