United States v. Martinez, No. 11-13295 (11th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted under 18 U.S.C. 875(c) for knowingly transmitting a threatening communication. Defendant then appealed to this court, asserting first that her indictment was deficient because it did not allege she subjectively intended to convey a threat to injure others, and second that section 875(c) was unconstitutionally overbroad if it did not require subjective intent. The court rejected both arguments, relying on its prior decision in United States v. Alaboud. The case comes before the court again for further consideration in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Elonis v. United States. In Elonis, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the defendant’s conviction under section 875(c), holding a jury instruction providing “that the Government need prove only that a reasonable person would regard [the defendant’s] communications as threats” was error. In this case, the indictment fails to allege defendant’s mens rea or facts from which her intent can be inferred, with regard to the threatening nature of her e-mail. In light of Elonis, the court concluded that its holdings in defendant's case and in Alaboud are overruled. Accordingly, the court vacated defendant's conviction and sentence, and remanded.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.