United States v. Drapeau
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13900
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Drapeau was convicted of assaulting a federal officer (Mousseau) during an on-site confrontation August 23, 2009 in Crow Creek Sioux Reservation.
- Mousseau, a BIA officer, was pursuing Drapeau after a prior incident and sought entry into Drapeau's home to check on a child.
- Drapeau pressed a window against Mousseau’s arm, injuring him, before Mousseau deployed a taser inside the home.
- Mousseau arrested Drapeau and Grassrope, and Medicine Crow (Drapeau’s wife) observed the events; a child was present in the home.
- Drapeau sought to introduce tribal resolutions and reputation testimony about Mousseau to prove self-defense and state of mind, which the district court limited.
- The district court later sua sponte limited and then allowed some reputation testimony, and the written supervised-release order added numerous conditions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence sufficed to show Mousseau engaged in official duties | Drapeau | Drapeau contends Mousseau acted unlawfully; assault cannot be in official capacity | Yes; substantial evidence supported Mousseau’s official-duty status |
| Whether Drapeau was entitled to present victim-reputation evidence for self-defense | Drapeau | Mousseau’s reputation for aggression admissible to show victim as aggressor | Yes; district court erred in excluding reputation evidence under Rule 404(a)(2) |
| Whether district court erred in excluding tribal resolutions/memo and applying Rule 404(b) | Drapeau | Resolutions not admissible under 404(a)(2); not affecting substantial rights | District court erred in excluding reputation testimony; error reversible but harmless for ultimate outcome |
| Whether supervised-release conditions were properly imposed | Drapeau | Conditions valid; constructive notice of standard conditions | No abuse of discretion; written conditions consistent with oral sentence |
| Whether written drug-testing condition needed explicit oral articulation | Drapeau | Constructive notice standard conditions apply | No plain error; district court properly imposed drug-testing condition |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Street, 66 F.3d 969 (8th Cir. 1995) (broad scope of what constitutes performance of official duties)
- United States v. Taken Alive, 262 F.3d 711 (8th Cir. 2001) (reputation evidence of victim’s violence relevant to self-defense)
- United States v. Bordeaux, 570 F.3d 1041 (8th Cir. 2009) (victim’s reputation admissible; applies to self-defense)
- United States v. Keiser, 57 F.3d 847 (9th Cir. 1995) (knowledge of victim’s character not prerequisite for Rule 404(a)(2) admissibility)
- United States v. Gregg, 451 F.3d 930 (8th Cir. 2006) (admissibility framework for character evidence in self-defense)