United States v. Crumble, No. 19-2197 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of ammunition. The court held that defendant failed to meet his burden to prove that his substantial rights were affected by the Rehaif error. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the government to present photos of individual frames of the surveillance video and there was no Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16 violation. Finally, the court held that defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable where the district court carefully considered the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors, including both the mitigating and aggravating factors.
Court Description: [Gruender, Author, with Wollman and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Defendant could not show his substantial rights under Rehaif were affected in part because he had a previous conviction for being a felon in possession of ammunition and had served a 60-month sentence on the conviction; there is no reasonable probability that but for the Rehaif error the outcome of the proceeding would have been different and defendant had failed to meet the plain error standard; the district court did not abuse its discretion by deciding not to exclude under Rule 16 the government's frame-by-frame version of the surveillance video previously provided to defendant; defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
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.