United States v. Chadwell, No. 14-30028 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction and sentence for being in possession of firearms while subject to a court order. The court concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it sent the properly admitted video exhibit into the jury room or when it provided the jury with the technology to view the video exhibit during deliberations in the privacy of the jury room. Further, the procedure used by the district court did not violate defendant's right to be present at every stage of the trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43(a). The court concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in applying a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed a jury conviction and sentence for being in possession of firearms while subject to a court order. The panel held that the district court did not abuse its discretion or violate defendant’s right to be present at all stages of the trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 43(a) when it permitted the jury to view a properly admitted video exhibit in the jury room during deliberations. The panel also held that the district court did not err in applying a four-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for using or possessing any firearm in connection with another felony offense.
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.