Mann

MEMORANDUM **

Joe Marion Mann appeals from his conviction, after a bench trial, for mailing threatening communications, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Mann contends that there was insufficient evidence to prove that his letter constituted a true threat. We disagree.

A statement constitutes a true threat if “a reasonable person would foresee that the statement would be interpreted by those to whom the maker communicates the statement as a serious expression of intent to harm.” See United States v. Orozco-Santillan, 903 F.2d 1262, 1265 (9th Cir.1990). In the present case there was ample evidence from which a factfinder could have concluded that a reasonable recipient of Mann’s letter would have interpreted it as a serious expression of intent to inflict harm. See id. at 1265-66 .

Mann next contends that there was insufficient proof of his specific intent to threaten. We are not persuaded. Judging the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a reasonable factfinder could have found that Mann intended to communicate a threat by means of his February 26, 2003 letter. See United States v. King, 122 F.3d…