United States v. Terry Harlan
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2602
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- Terry Lee Harlan, a Native American, was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 117 with domestic assault in Indian country by an habitual offender based on the charged 2014 assault and at least two prior assault convictions (2002 tribal-court simple-assault; 2003 federal conviction for assault resulting in serious bodily injury).
- Victim Marlene Freemont reported that Harlan struck her repeatedly, kicked her, and grabbed her arm; medical exam revealed contusions to face, head, arm, chest, and rib tenderness consistent with her account.
- Witnesses included the victim, medical examiner (PA Carmel Berglin), the victim’s sister Delilah (who testified about Harlan’s prior assaults), Harlan’s sister Andrea, Harlan’s daughter K.H., and Officer Webster; Andrea and K.H. did not directly witness the assault but heard yelling and saw the victim distressed.
- Harlan moved in limine to exclude the 2002 tribal conviction on grounds it was an attempt charge, not an actual assault; the district court admitted it as a predicate conviction under § 117(a)(1).
- A jury convicted Harlan; the district court imposed a 41-month sentence (bottom of the Guidelines). Harlan appealed, challenging admission of the tribal conviction, sufficiency of the evidence, and substantive reasonableness of his sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of 2002 tribal conviction as § 117 predicate | Harlan: the 2002 conviction was for "attempt," not assault, so it cannot satisfy § 117’s predicate-offense element. | Government: common-law definition of assault includes attempted battery; the tribal simple-assault conviction qualifies as "any assault." | Court: Affirmed admission — common-law "assault" encompasses attempt; district court did not abuse discretion. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for § 117 conviction | Harlan: Victim was intoxicated; injuries could result from falls; no one saw the assault; Harlan was impaired and lacked marks on hands. | Government: Victim’s prompt report, medical evidence consistent with assault, corroborating witness testimony, and officer observations support conviction. | Court: Evidence sufficient — reasonable jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Substantive reasonableness of 41-month sentence | Harlan: District court should have varied downward due to serious health problems. | Government: Court considered health but properly weighed prior assault history, lack of remorse, and gravity of domestic violence; within-Guidelines sentence warranted. | Court: Sentence substantively reasonable; no abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reiter v. Sonotone Corp., 442 U.S. 330 (statutory interpretation starts with statutory language)
- United States v. Turley, 352 U.S. 407 (use common-law meaning for undefined terms in federal criminal statutes)
- United States v. Olson, 646 F.3d 569 (describing common-law assault as including attempted battery and menacing)
- United States v. Woodard, 694 F.3d 950 (de novo review of statutory interpretation in § 117 context)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (sentencing reasonableness standard; abuse of discretion review)
- United States v. Bridges, 569 F.3d 374 (district court’s latitude in weighing § 3553(a) factors)