In US v. Smith, No. 09-2040, the court of appeals affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for sexual assault, holding that 1) nothing suggested that defendant was intoxicated, or otherwise incapable of sufficient comprehension, when the police advised him of his Miranda rights or when he signed the form acknowledging that he had been apprised of, understood, and waived those rights; 2) the presentment rule did not support suppressing defendant's confession; 3) the victim's statement that she had been raped constituted an excited utterance; and 4) the conditions of defendant's supervised release were linked to the offense and no broader than necessary to rehabilitate the defendant and protect the public.
As the court wrote: "A jury convicted Lehman Smith of sexual assault, and he was sentenced to 60 months' imprisonment and 36 months of supervised release. Smith appeals his conviction and sentence, raising four pretrial and trial issues: the district court erred by (1) refusing to suppress his confession, (2) admitting hearsay evidence under the excited-utterance exception, (3) finding that evidence sufficient to sustain his conviction was introduced, and (4) imposing special conditions of supervised release restricting his contact with minors and the disabled. Our jurisdiction arises under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 3742. We AFFIRM the rulings of the district court."
- Full Text of US v. Smith, No. 09-2040