United States v. Cornelius Johnson ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 18-4120
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    CORNELIUS JOHNSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
    Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:17-cr-00136-HEH-1)
    Submitted: September 24, 2018                                     Decided: October 4, 2018
    Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Geremy C. Kamens, Federal Public Defender, Alexandria, Virginia, Joseph S. Camden,
    Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER,
    Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. G. Zachary Terwilliger, United States Attorney,
    Alexandria, Virginia, Gabrielle M. Michalak, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    The United States charged Cornelius Johnson in a criminal information with
    simple assault, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(5) (2012), for an incident that occurred
    at the Hunter Holmes McGuire Veterans Administration Medical Hospital (“the McGuire
    VA Hospital”) in Richmond, Virginia. Johnson was convicted of the charge in a bench
    trial before a magistrate judge and appealed to the district court. The district court
    affirmed Johnson’s conviction. Johnson timely appealed.
    Section 113(a)(5) prohibits simple assault “within the special maritime and
    territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”      18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(5).   The “special
    maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States” includes:
    [a]ny lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States, and under
    the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or
    otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the
    State in which the same shall be, for the erection of a fort, magazine,
    arsenal, dockyard, or other needful building.
    18 U.S.C. § 7(3) (2012).       Johnson contends on appeal that the Government failed to
    establish at trial that the McGuire VA Hospital is within the special maritime and
    territorial jurisdiction of the United States and that the district court erred by taking
    judicial notice on appeal of the McGuire VA Hospital’s status as being within the
    territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
    Our review of the record on appeal and the district court’s thorough explanation
    leads us to conclude that the district court did not err in taking judicial notice that the
    McGuire VA Hospital is within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the
    United States. See United States v. Davis, 
    726 F.3d 357
    , 367 (2d Cir. 2013) (“whether a
    2
    particular plot of land falls within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the
    United States is a ‘legislative fact’ that may be judicially noticed”); United States v.
    Lavender, 
    602 F.2d 639
    (4th Cir. 1979) (appellate court may take judicial notice that
    Blue Ridge Parkway is within federal jurisdiction, even though lower court declined to do
    so).
    Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-4120

Filed Date: 10/4/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021