United States v. Woodrow Louis Kipp

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Woodrow Louis Kipp

624 F.2d 84, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 15480

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJuly 23, 1980

Docket80-1024

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 624 F.2d 84 (United States v. Woodrow Louis Kipp) 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. Woodrow Louis Kipp, 624 F.2d 84, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 15480 (9th Cir. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Kipp, an Indian, was convicted by a jury for having assaulted one Smith with a dangerous weapon. The offense stemmed from a “barroom brawl” on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Kipp appeals on the sole ground that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict.

The conviction must be affirmed if reasonable and prudent persons could have concluded that the evidence, taken in the light most favorable to the Government, Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 469, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942); United States v. Hughes, 626 F.2d 619 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Ponticelli, 622 F.2d 985, (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Basey, 613 F.2d 198, 201 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 1854, 64 L.Ed.2d 274 (1980), warranted a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 316-321, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-2791, 61 *85 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); United States v. Abraham, 617 F.2d 187, 190 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Gardner, 611 F.2d 770, 775 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Herrera-Medina, 609 F.2d 376, 380 (9th Cir. 1979); United States v. Friedman, 593 F.2d 109, 114-15 (9th Cir. 1979). The “clearly erroneous” standard has no application in the review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury verdict in a criminal case. Cf. United States v. Hudson, 609 F.2d 1326, 1329 (9th Cir. 1979); United States v. King, 552 F.2d 833, 852 (9th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 966, 97 S.Ct. 1646, 52 L.Ed.2d 357 (1977).

The altercation occurred in the darkness, but there is testimony in the record to the effect that Kipp “struck” the victim Smith, that Kipp had a knife in his hand shortly before striking Smith, and that Smith suffered a knife cut. The jury was entitled to consider the evidence as a whole, including reasonable inferences that could be drawn therefrom. United States v. Nelson, 419 F.2d 1237, 1242-45 (9th Cir. 1969).

The judgment is

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Kipp, an Indian, was convicted by a jury for having assaulted one Smith with a dangerous weapon. The offense stemmed from a “barroom brawl” on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Kipp appeals on the sole ground that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict.

The conviction must be affirmed if reasonable and prudent persons could have concluded that the evidence, taken in the light most favorable to the Government, Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 469, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942); United States v. Hughes, 626 F.2d 619 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Ponticelli, 622 F.2d 985, (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Basey, 613 F.2d 198, 201 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 1854, 64 L.Ed.2d 274 (1980), warranted a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 316-321, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-2791, 61 *85 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); United States v. Abraham, 617 F.2d 187, 190 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Gardner, 611 F.2d 770, 775 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Herrera-Medina, 609 F.2d 376, 380 (9th Cir. 1979); United States v. Friedman, 593 F.2d 109, 114-15 (9th Cir. 1979). The “clearly erroneous” standard has no application in the review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury verdict in a criminal case. Cf. United States v. Hudson, 609 F.2d 1326, 1329 (9th Cir. 1979); United States v. King, 552 F.2d 833, 852 (9th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 966, 97 S.Ct. 1646, 52 L.Ed.2d 357 (1977).

The altercation occurred in the darkness, but there is testimony in the record to the effect that Kipp “struck” the victim Smith, that Kipp had a knife in his hand shortly before striking Smith, and that Smith suffered a knife cut. The jury was entitled to consider the evidence as a whole, including reasonable inferences that could be drawn therefrom. United States v. Nelson, 419 F.2d 1237, 1242-45 (9th Cir. 1969).

The judgment is

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

624 F.2d 84, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 15480, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-woodrow-louis-kipp-ca9-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack