United States v. Frankie Kindness , 551 F. App'x 303 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            DEC 30 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 13-30048
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 1:12-cr-00071-RFC
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    FRANKIE DUSHANE KINDNESS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Montana
    Richard F. Cebull, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted December 17, 2013**
    Before:        GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    Frankie Dushane Kindness appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for
    depredation of government property, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 1361
    . We have
    jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we affirm.
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    Kindness contends that the district court erred by imposing a six-level
    official-victim sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(c)(1). She alleges
    that she did not act wilfully and the officers’ apprehension of harm was not
    objectively reasonable. We review the district court’s interpretation of the
    Sentencing Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. See United
    States v. Rivera-Alonzo, 
    584 F.3d 829
    , 836 (9th Cir. 2009). The record supports
    the district court’s determination that Kindness assaulted the officers “in a manner
    creating a substantial risk of serious bodily injury.” See U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(c);
    United States v. Acosta-Sierra, 
    690 F.3d 1111
    , 1119-20 (9th Cir. 2012) (assault
    requires showing that defendant cause “a reasonable apprehension of immediate
    bodily harm”).
    Kindness also contends that under section 3A1.2(c)(1), the enhancement
    should not apply because the assault was not committed in the course of, or in the
    immediate flight from, an offense distinct from the assault itself. To the contrary,
    the enhancement is appropriate because these were “circumstances tantamount to
    aggravated assault,” “committed in the course of, or in immediate flight
    following,” Kindness’s commission of depredation of government property.
    U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2 cmt. n.4(A).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                     13-30048
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-30048

Citation Numbers: 551 F. App'x 303

Judges: Goodwin, Graber, Wallace

Filed Date: 12/30/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023