United States v. Jacob Monteer, No. 22-3659 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Defendant was charged in a five-count indictment with attempted bank robbery involving assault with a dangerous weapon. The district court found Defendant guilty of the five offenses and sentenced him to 230 months imprisonment. Defendant appealed his conviction, arguing the evidence was insufficient to convict him of any offense; the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress involuntary custodial statements he made to an FBI agent; and the district court erred by failing to include the term “knowingly” in reciting the elements of the Count II, III, and IV offenses when explaining its decision during a post-trial hearing.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed. The court explained that the district court considers the evidence submitted at trial and makes findings of fact and conclusions of law in determining whether the government has proved the offenses charged in the indictment beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, the indictment charged that Defendant “knowingly” brandished and used a pistol during and in relation to a crime of violence (Count II), “knowingly” discharged and used a pistol during and in relation to a crime of violence (Count III), and “knowingly” discharged and used an AR-15 rifle during and in relation to a crime of violence (Count IV). The court explained that neither filed a post-trial motion challenging the court’s findings and conclusions even though stand-by counsel was granted a one-month extension of time to do so. The evidence that Defendant committed these three offenses “knowingly” was overwhelming. There was no error, plain or otherwise.
Court Description: [Loken, Author, with Gruender and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. The evidence was sufficient to support defendant's convictions for bank robbery involving assault with a dangerous weapon, knowingly using a firearm during a crime of violence, knowingly discharging a handgun during a crime of violence, knowingly discharging a rifle during a crime of violence, and being an unlawful drug user in possession of firearms; the district court did not err in finding that mental health issues were not sufficient to make defendant's custodial statements involuntary and inadmissible; in light of the overwhelming evidence that defendant knowingly committed his firearms offenses, there was no error when the district court failed to include the word knowingly in its post-bench trial oral findings.
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.