United States v. Nicklas, No. 12-3028 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was found guilty of transmitting a facsimile communication containing a threat to injure FBI agents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 875(c), and was sentenced to 45 months of imprisonment. On appeal, defendant challenged his conviction. After being indicted, defendant was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. The court concluded that section 875(c) did not require the government to prove a defendant specifically intended his or her statements to be threatening but rather required the government to prove a reasonable recipient would have interpreted defendant's communication as a serious threat to injury; therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it granted the government's motion to strike the word "willfully" from the indictment under section 875(c); the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting a proposed instruction on reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment,
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. In a prosecution for transmitting a fax containing a threat to injure in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 875(c), the court did not err in granting the government's motion to strike the word "wilfully" from the indictment as the section creates a general intent crime and the section does not require the government to prove a defendant specifically intended his or her statements to be threatening; instead, the government must prove a reasonable recipient would have interpreted the fax as a serious threat to injure; as a result, the word willful was properly stricken as surplusage; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction; no error in refusing to give defendant's proposed instruction on reasonable doubt as it was foreclosed by circuit precedent.
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.