Delgado-Peru v. United States (1993)

See, e.g., United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 619-20 (8th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S. Ct. 986 (1993), cited ante at 592-93.

See United States v. Sands, 968 F.2d 1058, 1064 (10th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 (1993); Soundingsides, 820 F.2d at 1242; see also United States v. Boyles, 57 F.3d 535, 541 (7th Cir. 1995); United States v. Echeverry, 759 F.2d 1451, 1454 (9th Cir. 1985). 68 A specific intent crime is one in which an act was committed voluntarily and purposely with the specific intent to do something the law forbids.

See id.

See United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 620 (8th Cir.1992) (standard of review), cert, denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S.Ct. 986 , 122 L.Ed.2d 139 (1993); United States v. Duke, 255 F.3d 656, 659 (8th Cir.) (criteria for granting new trial based on newly discovered evidence), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 550 , 151 L.Ed.2d 426 (2001).

See United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 619-20 (8th Cir.1992) (standard of review), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S.Ct. 986 , 122 L.Ed.2d 139 (1993).

See, e.g., United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 619-20 (8th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S. Ct. 986 (1993), cited ante at 6-7.

See United States v. Sands, 968 F.2d 1058, 1064 (10th Cir.1992), cert. denied 506 U.S. 1056 (1993); United States v. Soundingsides, 820 F.2d 1232, 1242 (10th Cir.1987).

See United States v. Sands, 968 F.2d 1058, 1064 (10th Cir. 1992), cert. denied 506 U.S. 1056 (1993); United States v. Soundingsides, 820 F.2d 1232, 1242 (10th Cir. 1987). -3- Thus, Armstrong's ineffective assistance of counsel claims hinge upon whether he was charged with a specific intent crime or a general intent crime.

See 18 U.S.C. § 3500 (e)(2) (defining "statement" as, among other things, "a stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording, or a transcription thereof, which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement made by said witness and recorded contemporaneously with the making of such oral statement"). 18 Cuevas's argument is foreclosed by United States v. Bobadilla-Lopez, 954 F.2d 519 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S.Ct. 987 , 122 L.Ed.2d …

See Rouse, 410 F.3d at 1009 (noting that this skepticism towards recantations “‘is especially applicable in cases of child sexual abuse where recantation is a recurring phenomenon,’ particularly ‘when family members are involved and the child has feelings of guilt or the family members seek to influence the child to change her story.’””) (quoting United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 621 (8th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 (1993)).

See United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 621 (8th Cir.1992) (district court did not err in finding recantation not credible where, among other factors, the recantation came “more than four years” after trial), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S.Ct. 986 , 122 L.Ed.2d 139 (1993).

United States v. Grey Bear, 116 F.3d 349, 350-51 (8th Cir.1997); see also, United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 620 (8th Cir.1992) (probability that a recantation would lead to acquittal “rests in large part on the credibility of the recantation”), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1056 , 113 S.Ct. 986 , 122 L.Ed.2d 139 (1993). ' [¶ 46] Simply put, neither R.A. nor her testimony was credible. 10 It is therefore very unlikely that her recantations would have been believed and would h…

See People v. Johnson (1992), 149 Ill. 2d 118, 159 , 594 N.E.2d 253 , cert. denied (1993), 506 U.S. 1056 , 122 L.