United States v. Justin Janis, 810 F.3d 595

Janis allegedly assaulted Ann Mousseau during a 2013 response to alleged alcohol consumption on the Pine Ridge Reservation; Mousseau is an Oglala Sioux Tribe (OST) Department of Public Safety officer.
Janis was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 111 for assaulting a federal officer.
The OST had a § 638 contract with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for law‑enforcement services; the district court found tribal officers employed under that contract are federal officers for § 111 purposes.
Janis moved to dismiss claiming OST officers were not federal officers because the tribe had not authorized the BIA to enforce tribal law; the district court denied the motion.
At trial Janis and the Government stipulated that Mousseau was employed by OST as a public safety officer and doing her job; the district court nonetheless instructed the jury that Mousseau was a federal officer as a matter of law.
The jury convicted Janis; on appeal the Eighth Circuit affirmed, holding the jury‑instruction error was harmless given the stipulation and overwhelming evidence.

Issue	Janis' Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether OST public safety officers are "federal officers" under 18 U.S.C. § 111 when enforcing tribal law	OST officers are not federal officers absent specific tribal authorization delegating enforcement to the Secretary/BIA	OST officers operating under a § 638 contract with the BIA are federal officers for § 111 while performing official duties, regardless of whether enforcing tribal law	The district court correctly held OST officers employed under the § 638 contract qualify as federal officers for § 111 purposes
Whether the court erred by instructing the jury that Mousseau was a federal officer as a matter of law	The jury should decide whether Mousseau personally was an OST officer (and thus a federal officer) at the time	The court may decide as a matter of law that the department classifies as federal officers; individual status and whether acting in official capacity are jury questions	The court erred by declaring Mousseau a federal officer as a matter of law, but the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because of Janis’s stipulation and uncontroverted evidence

United States v. Schrader, 10 F.3d 1345 (8th Cir.) (tribal officers under § 638 contracts receive § 111 protection while performing official duties)
United States v. Bettelyoun, 16 F.3d 850 (8th Cir.) (jury must determine whether particular assault victims are federal officers)
United States v. Roy, 408 F.3d 484 (8th Cir.) (court may decide as a matter of law that a tribal department, as a class, qualifies as federal officers; individual status is for the jury)
United States v. Drapeau, 644 F.3d 646 (8th Cir.) (clarifies limits of prior statements — does not overrule rule that individual officer status is a jury question)
Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999) (harmless‑error standard for omitted or misstated jury‑instruction elements)