United States v. Red Eagle

Good Law
60 F. App'x 155
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 2003No. 02-30187; D.C. No. CR-01-00093-1-SEHCalifornia854 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Elmer Red Eagle, Jr. appeals his conviction of involuntary manslaughter in the death of his son. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 (a) and 1112(a). The offense requires a reckless or wanton mental state. See United States v. Paul, 37 F.3d 496, 499 (9th Cir.1994). We reverse.

Red Eagle contends that there was insufficient evidence of reckless or wanton conduct. “The Supreme Court has ... explained that the criminal law generally permits a finding of recklessness only when persons disregard a risk of harm of which they are aware.” United States v. Albers, 226 F.3d 989, 995 (9th Cir.2000) (citing Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, *156 836-87 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994)). Quoting the Model Penal Code definition, we have also defined the term “recklessly” as when a person “consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct.” Albers, 226 F.3d at 995 (emphasis added). That risk must be “of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor’s conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding…

Dissenting Opinion

Gould, J.

Dissenting.

The panel majority correctly sets out the requirements for an involuntary manslaughter conviction, and then proceeds incorrectly to replace the jury’s judgment' with its own. There was sufficient evidence presented to the jury to sustain the conviction. This included: (1) a statement that Red Eagle, on the very evening that the tragic accident killing the infant occurred, had told his infant son’s mother Tanya not to drink because Red Eagle wanted Tanya to take care of their children; (2) evidence that showed that Red Eagle removed his infant son from the care of his daughters; (3) a statement by Red Eagle’s daughter Angela that she tried to take the baby from Red Eagle’s bed back into her own custody but Red Eagle prevented her from doing so; and (4) a statement by Red Eagle that he consumed between thirty and forty cans of beer before sleeping with his infant son in his bed.

Reviewing the evidence presented against Red Eagle in the light most favorable to the government, a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Red Eagle had a subjective awareness of the risk posed by putting his infant son in the bed and going to sleep with him…

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.