U.S. v. Seaman, 93-10305
| Decision Date | 04 March 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-10305,93-10305 |
| Citation | 18 F.3d 649 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lloyd Clint SEAMAN; Elwood Wayne Hage, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Stephen M. Levine, San Francisco, California, Mark L. Pollot and Michael J. Van Zandt of Keck, Mahin & Cate, San Francisco, California, for the defendants-appellants.
Julian A. Cook, III, and Monte N. Stewart, Assistant United States Attorneys, Las Vegas, Nevada, for the plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
Before: CHOY, SCHROEDER, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.
Elwood Wayne Hage and Lloyd Clint Seaman were charged and convicted, after a jury trial, of doing more than $100 in damage to government property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1361, and disposing of government property valued in excess of $100 without authority in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 641.
The defendants-appellants raise a number of issues on appeal, but the dispositive questions are whether the government proved, first, that the value of the property appellants disposed of exceeded $100 and, second, whether the damage to government property exceeded $100. Because we hold that the evidence was insufficient as to each count for each defendant, we reverse the convictions. We need not address the other issues raised.
The conduct of the defendants leading to their convictions was the cutting and taking away of trees from government property without authorization. The government charged that the value of the government's trees carried away exceeded $100 and the damage done to the government's property exceeded $100.
To obtain a conviction under Sec. 641, the government must prove the following four elements: (1) the defendant embezzled, stole, purloined, or knowingly converted to his use or the use of another; (2) things of value; (3) the things of value were federal money or property worth more than $100; and (4) the defendant did such acts willfully and with the intent to appropriate the property to a use inconsistent with the owner's rights and benefits. 1 To obtain a conviction under section 1361, the government must prove four elements: (1) the defendant willfully injured or committed a depridation (2) against the property (3) of the United States and (4) the value of the property damaged exceeded $100. 2
Although the government could have charged the defendants with the included misdemeanor offenses of taking and damaging property of value less than $100, no such charges were made. All parties agree that if the government failed to prove that the property taken or the damage done exceeded $100 in value, the defendants should have been acquitted.
The defendants at all times during the trial contested the quantity of wood removed from federal as opposed to private land, as well as the value of the trees that were carried away. The prosecution proved that the equivalent of nine cords of wood was cut from government property. The only evidence offered by the government as to the value of those trees was that Seaman advertised to sell firewood at $500 for four cords, $600 for five cords, and $1,100 for eleven cords. The government asks us to use these prices as reflecting the value of the property removed from the federal land.
The defendants point out, however, that what they removed from government property was felled trees, while what they offered for sale was seasoned firewood that had been chopped, packaged, and transported to a convenient place for marketing.
The government counters that the statute...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Melaku
...statutory elements as (1) willful conduct by defendant to (2) damage property (3) belonging to government); United States v. Seaman , 18 F.3d 649, 650 (9th Cir. 1994) (stating that statutory elements require that defendant (1) willfully injured or committed a depredation (2) against propert......
-
U.S. v. Webber
...(2d Cir.1999) (interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 641) (citing Theriault v. United States, 434 F.2d 212, 214 (5th Cir.1970)); United States v. Seaman, 18 F.3d 649, 650 (9th Cir. 1994); United States v. Wilson, 284 F.2d 407, 408 (4th Cir. 1960); see also United States v. Sargent, 504 F.3d 767, 771 (9t......
-
United States v. Lee
...U.S. 1142, 106 S.Ct. 1796, 90 L.Ed.2d 341 (1986) ; Churder v. United States, 387 F.2d 825, 833 (8th Cir. 1968) ; United States v. Seaman, 18 F.3d 649, 650 (9th Cir. 1994) ; United States v. Alberico, 604 F.2d 1315, 1321 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 992, 100 S.Ct. 524, 62 L.Ed.2d 422 ......
-
Estate of Hage v. United States
...Id. Mr. Hage was subsequently prosecuted and convicted for damaging and removing government property (the trees). United States v. Seaman, 18 F.3d 649 (9th Cir.1994). The conviction, however, was overturned on the ground of inadequate proof of the value of the property damaged and removed. ......
-
Case summaries.
...133 F.3d at 1156. (181) Id. at 1157 (quoting United States v. Tutino, 883 F.2d 1125, 1141 (2d Cir. 1989)). (182) FED. R. EVID. 702. (183) 18 F.3d 649 (9th Cir. (184) 133 F.3d at 1158. (185) Id. (186) Id. (187) Id. (188) 438 U.S. 154 (1978). (189) 133 F.3d at 1158 (quoting Franks v. Delaware......