United States v. Michael Thomas, 877 F.3d 1077

Defendant Michael M. Thomas was convicted by a jury of domestic assault by an habitual offender and assaulting an intimate partner by suffocation or attempted suffocation in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 113(a)(8), 117, and 1153.
Victim Morgyn Redhorn testified Thomas pushed her onto a couch, covered her mouth and nose, impeded her breathing, and threatened to "put me out;" she feared losing consciousness and for her life.
A neighbor heard screams and police observed Redhorn with a swollen lip, reddened face, and upset demeanor; jury convicted on both counts and district court sentenced Thomas to 37 months concurrent.
After verdict, jurors told the judge they believed Thomas did not intend to hurt the victim and that his actions were "negligent," a comment the judge relayed at sentencing.
Thomas appealed, arguing (1) insufficient evidence for the suffocation assault conviction and (2) the jurors’ post‑verdict statement showed they failed to follow the court’s instructions, warranting reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for suffocation/attempted suffocation under 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(8)	Evidence (Redhorn’s testimony and corroboration) supports recklessness and the statutory elements	Argued victim testimony lacked credibility, undermined by absence of photos and Facebook posts; jury stated actions were "negligent" not intentional	Affirmed: viewing evidence in favor of verdict, victim testimony plus corroboration permits a reasonable jury to find at least recklessness; conviction stands
Juror statement suggesting negligence indicates jury failed to follow instructions / juror misconduct	Juror comment shows jury did not apply the court’s instruction defining suffocation as intentional, knowing, or reckless	Court presumption that juries follow instructions; post‑verdict comment not evidence of extraneous influence; Rule 606(b) bars juror impeachment absent improper influence	Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; juror remark insufficient to rebut presumption that jury followed instructions and no extraneous influence alleged

United States v. Bell, 761 F.3d 900 (8th Cir. 2014) (victim testimony can suffice to prove suffocation offense)
United States v. Morales, 445 F.3d 1081 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence: reverse only if no reasonable jury could convict)
United States v. L.B.G., 131 F.3d 1276 (8th Cir. 1997) (uncorroborated testimony of a single witness may sustain conviction)
United States v. Tillman, 765 F.3d 831 (8th Cir. 2014) (appellate court will not reassess witness credibility)
United States v. Conway, 754 F.3d 580 (8th Cir. 2014) (credibility determinations reserved for juries)
United States v. Lashley, 251 F.3d 706 (8th Cir. 2001) (juror misconduct review for abuse of discretion)
United States v. Myers, 503 F.3d 676 (8th Cir. 2007) (presumption that juries follow instructions)
Weeks v. Angelone, 528 U.S. 225 (2000) (courts presume juries follow instructions)
United States v. Vig, 167 F.3d 443 (8th Cir. 1999) (Rule 606(b) limits juror testimony to impeach verdict absent extraneous influence)
Doe By & Through G.S. v. Johnson, 52 F.3d 1448 (7th Cir. 1995) (discussed by appellant regarding juror statements and instruction noncompliance)