United States v. Romeo Luan Arreola, 422 F.2d 869 (10th Cir. 1970). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Romeo Luan Arreola, 422 F.2d 869 (10th Cir. 1970). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Kendall Shannon Bruce
10th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See, e.g., United States v. Cooper, 812 F.2d 1283, 1286 (10th Cir.1987) (upholding conviction on a lesser offense raised sua sponte by district court on ground that "trial judge must give instructions to the jury as required by the evidence and the law where the parties so request or not, and to do so although objections are made”); United States v. Arreola, 422 F.2d 869, 869 (10th Cir.1970) (applying plain error to a claim that trial court erred in failing to give a lesser-included instruction though none was requested). 4 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Bruce
10th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See, e.g., United States v. Cooper, 812 F.2d 1283, 1286 (10th Cir. 1987) (upholding conviction on a lesser offense raised sua sponte by district court on ground that “trial judge must give instructions to the jury as required by the evidence and the law where the parties so request or not, and to do so although objections are made”); United States v. Arreola, 422 F.2d 869, 869 (10th Cir. 1970) (applying plain error to a claim that trial court erred in failing to give a lesser-included instruction though none w as requested). -14- It is doubtful whether the district court committed error of…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hooks v. Ward
10th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
That alone bars him from claiming error on this point.” (emphasis added)); United States v. Duran, 127 F.3d 911, 914-15 (10th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 118 S.Ct. 1389 , 140 L.Ed.2d 648 (1998); Fitzgerald v. United States, 719 F.2d 1069, 1071 (10th Cir.1983); United States v. Chapman, 615 F.2d 1294, 1299 (10th Cir.1980); United States v. Coppola, 526 F.2d 764, 773 (10th Cir.1975); but see United States v. Cooper, 812 F.2d 1283, 1286 (10th Cir.1987) (upholding conviction on a lesser included offense that was instructed to the jury sua sponte by the court holding: “The trial judg…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Romeo Luan ARREOLA, Defendant-Appellant
529-69.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Mar 13, 1970.
422 F.2d 869
William R. Burkett, U. S. Atty., for appellee., Tom S. Williams, Oklahoma City, Okl. (Robert H. Sherman, Oklahoma City, Okl., on the brief), for appellant.
Breitenstein, Seth, Holloway.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

A jury found defendant-appellant Arreola guilty of assault with intent to do bodily harm and by use of a dangerous weapon on land within the jurisdiction of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113. He appeals from the judgment imposing sentence.

Defendant and Jose Maria Leal, Jr., were inmates at the Federal Reformatory in El Reno, Oklahoma. Defendant admitted that he stabbed Leal with a knife and claimed that he did it in self-defense. He seeks a reversal on the ground that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense. No request for such an instruction was made and no objection was made at the trial because of the omission of such an instruction. The argument is that the defect is a plain error affecting substantial rights and should be noticed under Rule 52(b), F.R.Crim.P.

The matter is foreclosed by our decision in Hanks v. United States, 10 Cir., 388 F.2d 171, 175, cert. denied 393 U.S. 863, 89 S.Ct. 144, 21 L.Ed.2d 131, which holds that when the evidence discloses only an assault with a deadly weapon failure to instruct on a lesser offense is not plain error. In the case at bar the charge and the proof related only to an assault with a knife approximately eight inches in length. No claim is made that the knife was not a dangerous weapon. There is no dispute over the fact that the defendant did stab Leal with the knife. Absent such a factual dispute there was no error in not instructing on the lesser offense. See Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343, 350, 85 S.Ct. 1004, 13 L.Ed.2d 882.

Affirmed.