United States v. James

169 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir. 1999)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

James (D) dated Ogden, a good ole fashion bad boy who bragged about killing a man as well as brutally beating others. D was a victim of Ogden's violence. When Ogden was intoxicated, and D refused to have sexual intercourse, Ogden threw her on the bed and raped her. In the presence of D’s daughter, Ogden yelled at D for refusing sex. The daughter got up and held Ogden at knifepoint until D ordered them both to desist. In another incident, D had to break a glass and threaten Ogden with it when she refused sex. Ogden once beat a man for allegedly looking at D. D and the daughter, told Ogden to stop, but he kept kicking and hitting the man, so D tried to dial 911. Ogden ripped the phone out of the wall. They went to another phone in the bedroom, and Ogden broke the door down, on top of the daughter. D put the phone down, and the daughter started hitting and kicking Ogden, breaking some of his ribs. D told them both to stop and told Ogden to leave. They both complied. D and Ogden would go out for dinner, a few drinks, and window shopping, and he would start yelling at strangers and challenging them to fight. Sometimes he and the strangers would fight. D also testified Ogden used to take his knife out of his sock, open and close it, and switch it back and forth between hands as if he were in a fight. The daughter had beaten Ogden on three occasions, and he would never fight back against her even though she was only 14. Ogden hated the daughter’s boyfriend. Ogden, the daughter, D, and Tiatano were at a party. Ogden had threatened Taitano with a hammer. D decided to leave the party, and her van got stuck. The daughter and D heard Tiatano being hit by Ogden holding an object in his hand. It broke his nose and rendered him unconscious. Tiatano was brought to the house. The daughter got out of the van and chased Ogden and went to D’s side of the van. D gave the daughter a loaded gun that was supposed to be on safety and told her how to take it off safety. The daughter shot Odgen at point-blank range. D argued self-defense. In motions, the court ruled that D could not introduce extrinsic evidence of which they had no knowledge at that time most of which confirmed Ogden’s braggadocio that he was a very dangerous and unpredictable person capable of great harm to others. During deliberations, the jury sent questions wanting to know the truth of Ogden’s violent past. The judge declined the requests. 'because the court record, never seen by the defendant, could not have affected her state of mind. The result should be no different when the defendant offers the extraneous record.' D appealed her conviction, and eventually, the court heard the issue en banc.