Small cut to victim’s mouth does not qualify as “significant” injury for purposes of bodily injury sentence enhancement in assault case
SENTENCING United States v. Majia-Canales, No. 05-4218, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Nov. 8, 2006)(Utah). Appeal of sentence for assault on federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111. HELD: District court’s enhancement of defendant’s sentence for inflicting bodily injury on victim was clearly erroneous where evidence indicated that only injuries suffered were red spot on forehead and small cut to mouth. Sentence enhancement for bodily injury requires that injuries be “significant” (i.e., injuries must be painful, obvious, or of a type for which medical attention ordinarily would be sought). In this instance, where victim did not testify and only evidence of victim’s injuries consisted solely of presentence report’s cursory description of “small laceration” and indistinct photographs of officer’s head and mouth, such evidence is insufficient for finding of bodily injury because it speaks to neither lasting nor painful nature of injuries. Read the opinion here. |
Comments on "Small cut to victim’s mouth does not qualify as “significant” injury for purposes of bodily injury sentence enhancement in assault case"