829 F.3d 681
8th Cir.2016Background
- Defendant Stoney End of Horn was convicted by a jury of four counts of sexual abuse of a minor and one count of assault resulting in serious bodily injury for conduct occurring in Indian country; convictions and sentences were appealed.
- Assault facts: after a heated argument with his girlfriend Pauline Brave Crow during a late-September 2008 drive, End of Horn allegedly struck Brave Crow; eyewitnesses observed an argument, screams, and at least one witness saw End of Horn striking her; Brave Crow sustained a LeFort III facial fracture, required surgeries, and later died of complications.
- Sexual-abuse facts: a relative, S.N.H. (a minor), testified that End of Horn molested and had intercourse with her multiple times in 2010 while she lived in the household and viewed him as a father figure.
- Procedural posture: separate grand juries charged End of Horn with murder/assault and with multiple sexual-abuse counts; trials were consolidated; jury convicted on assault, murder, and four sexual-abuse counts, but the district court set aside the murder verdict under the year-and-a-day rule and sentenced on the remaining counts.
- Sentencing: district court imposed concurrent 293-month sentences on the sexual-abuse counts (after an upward departure) and 120 months for the assault; End of Horn appealed convictions and sentencing rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of sexual-abuse evidence | Government: victim testimony alone can support conviction | End of Horn: no physical evidence and inconsistent post-incident behavior of victim made testimony unreliable | Court: victim testimony credible and sufficient; convictions affirmed |
| Admission of hearsay (Brave Crow’s statement to ex-husband) | Government: statement admissible under Rule 807 residual exception | End of Horn: testimony was hearsay and should be excluded | Court: assumed error in admission but applied harmless-error review and found error harmless given strong corroborating evidence |
| Upward departure based on criminal-history under USSG §4A1.3 | Government/district court: uncounted state and tribal convictions justify upward departure | End of Horn: departure unwarranted | Court: departure under §4A1.3 was not an abuse of discretion |
| Upward departure based on death resulting from offense under USSG §5K2.1 | Government/district court: assault caused Brave Crow’s death, supporting departure | End of Horn: departure improper | Court: district court’s finding that assault caused death was not clearly erroneous; reliance on §5K2.1 proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Ball v. United States, 140 U.S. 118 (1891) (year-and-a-day rule discussion)
- United States v. Seibel, 712 F.3d 1229 (8th Cir. 2013) (victim testimony alone can support conviction)
- United States v. Kenyon, 397 F.3d 1071 (8th Cir. 2005) (credibility for jury; sufficiency review)
- United States v. Renville, 779 F.2d 430 (8th Cir. 1985) (purpose and scope of Rule 807 residual exception)
- Idaho v. Wright, 497 U.S. 805 (1990) (trustworthiness requirement for hearsay exceptions)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (effect on Confrontation Clause jurisprudence)
- Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (1946) (harmless-error standard for nonconstitutional errors)
- United States v. Shillingstad, 632 F.3d 1031 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for upward departures)