United States v. Andrew Maker

375 F. App'x 792
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedApril 15, 2010
Docket09-10180
StatusUnpublished

This text of 375 F. App'x 792 (United States v. Andrew Maker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Andrew Maker, 375 F. App'x 792 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Andrew Maker appeals from his bench-trial conviction for simple assault within a special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(5). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Maker contends that his conviction should be reversed because there was insufficient evidence that the offense took place within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, see United States v. Stanton, 501 F.3d 1093, 1099 (9th Cir.2007), a rational trier of fact could have found that the offense took place within the boundaries of Fort Mason, which Maker does not dispute is located on federal land. See United States v. Coutchavlis, 260 F.3d 1149, 1153-54 (9th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. James C. Coutchavlis
260 F.3d 1149 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)
United States v. Stanton
501 F.3d 1093 (Ninth Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
375 F. App'x 792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-andrew-maker-ca9-2010.