United States v. Hatch
490 F. App'x 136
10th Cir.2012Background
- Ms. Hatch pled guilty to assault resulting in serious bodily injury in Indian Country, based on a video of the attack.
- The district court applied a four-level enhancement under § 2A2.2(b)(2)(B) because it found Hatch used a dangerous weapon (her sneakers).
- The assault occurred in Indian Country; Wells was severely intoxicated and largely defenseless during the attack.
- Hatch argued the district court’s underlying facts were erroneous, challenging the defenseless-victim and head-directed-kicks findings.
- The government relied on Serrata to justify treating sneakers as a dangerous weapon and affirmed the sentence on appeal.
- The panel affirmed, holding no clear error in the challenged factual findings and upholding the § 2A2.2(b)(2)(B) enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wells was a defenseless victim. | Wells was defenseless. | Wells retained some protection and wasn't defenseless. | Not clearly erroneous; Wells defenseless. |
| Whether Hatch almost exclusively directed kicks at Wells’s head. | Kicks targeted Wells’s head. | Kicks not exclusively to head; some to arms. | Not clearly erroneous; kicks directed to head. |
| Standard and scope of review of the factual findings supporting the enhancement. | Court correctly reviewed underlying facts for clear error. | Standard of review applied appropriately. | Evidence supported the factual findings and the enhancement. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Serrata, 425 F.3d 886 (10th Cir. 2005) (describes broad application of dangerous-weapon concept under § 2A2.2)
- United States v. Talamante, 981 F.2d 1153 (10th Cir. 1992) (clear-error standard for reviewing district court factual findings)