United States v. Guinn, 89 F.4th 838

Christopher Guinn was convicted of aggravated sexual abuse and assault for raping and strangling his pregnant girlfriend, K.F.
At trial, the government introduced testimony and protective orders from two of Guinn’s prior girlfriends, E.B. and A.F., alleging sexual, physical, and emotional abuse by Guinn during their relationships.
The district court admitted this evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 413 (allowing prior sexual assault evidence) and issued a jury instruction accordingly.
Guinn was sentenced based on a criminal history calculation that included two prior violations of a protective order as separate convictions.
On appeal, Guinn argued the district court erroneously admitted evidence of nonsexual abuse under Rule 413 and miscalculated his criminal history.
The appellate court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), vacated Guinn’s sentence, and remanded for resentencing, but otherwise affirmed the convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of nonsexual abuse evidence under Rule 413	Guinn argued Rule 413 does not allow nonsexual abuse evidence; its admission was error.	Government asserted nonsexual evidence was intertwined and/or also admissible under Rule 404(b).	Unpreserved error; reviewed for plain error; no substantial rights affected, conviction affirmed.
Whether objections were preserved for appeal	Guinn claimed he preserved his Rule 413 objection by raising it pre-trial.	Government contended the specific objection regarding nonsexual evidence was not raised at trial.	Court agreed; issue not preserved; plain error review applies.
Whether cumulative errors at trial warranted reversal	Guinn argued prosecutor’s remarks and vouching led to cumulative error.	Government responded that comments were responses to defense and any alleged errors were not actual errors.	No actual errors found; cumulative error doctrine not applicable.
Sentencing error in criminal history calculation	Guinn asserted his two protective order violations should count as one under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2).	Government and court initially calculated as two separate convictions.	Error was clear; sentence vacated and remanded for recalculation under correct category.

United States v. Benally, 500 F.3d 1085 (10th Cir. 2007) (sets forth requirements for admitting prior sexual assault evidence under Rule 413)
United States v. Enjady, 134 F.3d 1427 (10th Cir. 1998) (framework for Rule 403 balancing for Rule 413 evidence)
Greer v. United States, 593 U.S. (2021) (plain error review—defendant must show outcome likely would have been different)
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain error standard requires defendant to show prejudice)
Molina-Martinez v. United States, 578 U.S. 189 (2016) (incorrect sentencing guidelines range is presumptively prejudicial)