United States v. Smith, No. 13-2728 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 39A(a), which imposes criminal liability on anyone who "knowingly aims the beam of a laser pointer at an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, or at the flight path of such an aircraft." Relying on plain text and common usage, the court concluded that section 39A(a)'s requirement that the laser beam be knowingly aimed does not require an offender to intend the beam to strike the aircraft or flight path in question. Because the district court correctly interpreted the statute, it did not err in excluding defendant's expert's irrelevant testimony and rejecting defendant's inapposite proposed instructions. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Criminal Case - conviction. In a case of first impression interpreting 18 U.S.C. sec. 39A(a), which imposes criminal liability on anyone who "knowingly aims the beam of a laser pointer at an aircraft . . . or at the flight path of such an aircraft," district court did not err in recognizing "knowingly" modifies both the aim and the aircraft element and that the "knowingly aim[ed]" does not require an offender to intend the beam to strike the aircraft of flight path in question. Thus, the district court did not err in excluding the expert's irrelevant testimony regarding atmospheric conditions or in rejecting Smith's proposed theory-of-defense jury instruction.
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.