Wyatt

United States v. Wyatt

Good Law
135 F. App'x 16
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 26, 2005No. 04-30316; D.C. No. CR-02-00036-DWM/LBECalifornia1,324 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Joel A. Wyatt and Rebecca Kay Smith (collectively “defendants”) appeal their convictions for (1) using, or aiding and abetting the use of, a hazardous or injurious device on federal land with the intent to obstruct a timber harvest; and (2) maintaining an unauthorized structure on National Forest land. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

The parties are familiar with the facts and we do not recount them here except as necessary. Defendants raise multiple issues, which we consider below.

*18 1. Sufficiency of the Evidence

Because defendants moved for acquittal on Count 1, we review their sufficiency of the evidence claim de novo. See United States v. Naghani, 361 F.3d 1255, 1261 (9th Cir.2004). Considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution, sufficient evidence exists to establish all five of the elements of 18 U.S.C. § 1864 (a)(2). First, although the record does not show any direct evidence defendants strung the yellow ropes themselves, the aiding and abetting element is established because defendants knew the purpose of the yellow ropes was to interfere with helicopter operations at the site, knew that their presence in the…

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.