United States v. Edsel Badoni, 694 F. App'x 592

Defendant Edsel Badoni was convicted of: Count One—assault with a dangerous weapon; Count Two—assault resulting in serious bodily injury; Count Three—discharging a firearm during a crime of violence (§ 924(c)).
District court sentenced Badoni to 46 months on Counts One and Two (concurrent) and a consecutive 120-month mandatory minimum on Count Three.
Defense sought a downward adjustment on the assault sentences in light of the consecutive § 924(c) mandatory minimum; the district court declined, indicating it believed consecutive sentencing was required and downward adjustment generally inappropriate.
At trial, the jury received a general unanimity instruction and the court’s model instructions on the elements of self-defense; defendant did not object to the absence of a separate unanimity instruction on self-defense.
The probation condition allowed searches of Badoni’s computers, electronic communications, and data storage; the government conceded that record did not support that condition.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether court plainly erred by not giving a separate unanimity instruction on self-defense	Government: general unanimity instruction and repeated unanimity language sufficed	Badoni: jury must unanimously reject self-defense; a special unanimity instruction was required	No plain error; general unanimity instruction and model self-defense instructions were adequate (Nobari, Kim, Southwell)
Whether district court could consider the § 924(c) consecutive mandatory minimum when sentencing predicate assault counts	Government: court may, but here declined to reduce sentences	Badoni: district court should account for the mandatory consecutive § 924(c) sentence when imposing assault sentences	Vacated assault sentences and remanded for resentencing in light of Dean v. United States (court unclear it considered § 924(c) sentence)
Whether the supervised-release search condition for electronic devices was supported by the record	Government conceded condition unsupported	Badoni: condition was overbroad and unsupported	Abuse of discretion; condition must be removed and case remanded to delete it (Carty)
Overall disposition of convictions and sentences	Government sought affirmation of convictions and sentences	Badoni sought vacatur or remand on sentencing and conditions	Convictions affirmed; sentences affirmed in part, vacated in part; remanded for resentencing and removal of the electronic-search condition

United States v. Nobari, 574 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir. 2009) (plain-error review of jury instructions when no objection made)
United States v. Southwell, 432 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2005) (jury must be unanimous to reject affirmative defense)
United States v. Kim, 196 F.3d 1079 (9th Cir. 1999) (general unanimity instruction usually sufficient)
Dean v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1170 (2017) (sentencing court may consider mandatory consecutive § 924(c) sentence when imposing sentence on predicate offense)
United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review)