Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 50 views

    United States v. Washington, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Douglas Washington was convicted in a bench trial by a magistrate judge of simple assault on a federal officer. He was sentenced to 80 days in prison and a $500 fine. Washington appealed the denial of his motion for acquittal to the district court, which affirmed the conviction. On further appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the district court properly assessed the evidence under a reasonable person standard and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed Washington's conviction and sentence and the district court's order.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Washington, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    50 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Douglas Washington was convicted in a bench trial by a magistrate judge of simple assault on a federal officer. He was sentenced to 80 days in prison and a $500 fine. Washington appealed the denial of his motion for acquittal to the district court, which affirmed the conviction. On further appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the district court properly assessed the evidence under a reasonable person standard and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed Washington's conviction and sentence and the district court's order.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-10-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-5006

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Douglas Washington was convicted in a bench trial by a magistrate judge of simple assault on a federal officer. He was sentenced to 80 days in prison and a $500 fine. Washington appealed the denial of his motion for acquittal to the district court, which affirmed the conviction. On further appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the district court properly assessed the evidence under a reasonable person standard and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed Washington's conviction and sentence and the district court's order.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    50 views3 pages

    United States v. Washington, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Douglas Washington was convicted in a bench trial by a magistrate judge of simple assault on a federal officer. He was sentenced to 80 days in prison and a $500 fine. Washington appealed the denial of his motion for acquittal to the district court, which affirmed the conviction. On further appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the district court properly assessed the evidence under a reasonable person standard and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed Washington's conviction and sentence and the district court's order.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-5006

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    DOUGLAS D. WASHINGTON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
    Judge. (CR-04-396)

    Submitted:

    September 28, 2005

    Decided:

    October 18, 2005

    Before LUTTIG, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Frank W. Dunham, Jr., Federal Public Defender, Michael S.


    Nachmanoff, Meghan S. Skelton, Assistant Federal Public Defenders,
    Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant.
    Paul J. McNulty, United
    States Attorney, Michael J. Elston, Assistant United States
    Attorney, Monica M. Goodling, Special Assistant United States
    Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Douglas D. Washington was convicted by a magistrate
    judge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3401 (2000), of simple assault on a
    federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. 111 (2000).
    sentenced

    to

    supervised

    eighty

    release

    days
    and

    in

    prison

    $500

    followed

    fine.

    by

    Following

    one

    He was
    year

    of

    sentencing,

    Washington appealed the magistrate judges ruling denying his


    motion for judgment of acquittal to the district court pursuant to
    Fed. R. Crim. P. 58(g)(2), and the district court affirmed.

    On

    appeal, Washington contends the district court erred in assessing


    the evidence of force and finding it sufficient to sustain his
    conviction.

    Finding no error, we affirm.

    Under Fed. R. Crim. P. 58(g), on appeal from a conviction


    and/or sentence imposed by a magistrate judge, the defendant is
    not entitled to a trial de novo by a district judge.

    The scope of

    the appeal is the same as in an appeal to the court of appeals from


    a judgment entered by a district judge.
    58(g)(2)(D).

    Fed. R. Crim. P.

    In determining whether sufficient evidence supports

    a conviction, the appropriate inquiry is whether, taking the


    evidence

    in

    the

    light

    most

    favorable

    to

    the

    Government,

    any

    reasonable trier of fact could have found the Defendant guilty


    beyond a reasonable doubt.
    80 (1942).

    Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60,

    In bench trials, the judge weighs the evidence,

    determines the credibility of the witnesses, and finds the facts

    - 2 -

    . . . [and] may select among conflicting inferences to be drawn


    from the testimony.
    (4th Cir. 1987).

    United States v. Bales, 813 F.2d 1289, 1293

    The standard of review for sufficiency of the

    evidence is de novo.

    See United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862

    (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc).


    Our review of the record convinces us the district court
    properly assessed the evidence under a reasonable person standard,
    and

    there

    conviction.

    was

    sufficient

    evidence

    to

    support

    Washingtons

    Accordingly, we affirm Washingtons conviction and

    sentence and the district courts order affirming the magistrate


    judges decision. We dispense with oral argument because the facts
    and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
    before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 3 -

    You might also like