Narrative Opinion Summary
In this appellate case, Tyson Keepseagle contested his convictions on three counts of child abuse under South Dakota law and 18 U.S.C. 1153. The jury found him guilty on Counts I, III, and IV, involving abuse of different children, while acquitting him on Count II. Keepseagle raised three issues on appeal: the district court's failure to provide a specific unanimity instruction for Count I, the sufficiency of evidence supporting his convictions, and the denial of his motion for a continuance. The appellate court found that the district court erred by not issuing a specific unanimity instruction for Count I, which led to vacating that conviction and remanding for a new trial. However, the court affirmed the convictions on Counts III and IV, citing sufficient evidence and the jury's role in credibility determinations. Furthermore, the court determined that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the continuance, as Keepseagle had ample time to prepare for trial. As a result, the appellate court vacated the conviction on Count I and remanded it for a new trial, while affirming the convictions on the remaining counts.
Legal Issues Addressed
Denial of Motion for Continuancesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in the district court's denial of Keepseagle's motion for a continuance, noting that he had sufficient time to prepare for trial.
Reasoning: Additionally, Keepseagle contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for a continuance to review new evidence received shortly before trial, which he claimed was pertinent for cross-examination.
Plain Error Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Keepseagle argued that the failure to provide a unanimity instruction constituted plain error, affecting his rights and the integrity of judicial proceedings, leading to a vacated conviction on Count I.
Reasoning: The failure to provide a special unanimity instruction was a plain error that prejudiced Keepseagle, affecting the fairness and integrity of the judicial proceedings.
Requirement of Unanimity Instructionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court found that the trial court erred by failing to provide a specific unanimity instruction for Count I of the indictment, which involved multiple distinct incidents of child abuse.
Reasoning: The appellate court agrees with the first point, determining that the district court erred by not providing a special unanimity instruction for Count I.
Sufficiency of Evidence for Convictionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court upheld the sufficiency of the evidence for Keepseagle's convictions on Counts III and IV, emphasizing that credibility determinations are the jury's responsibility.
Reasoning: The court emphasized that credibility findings are the jury's responsibility and are nearly unassailable on appeal, leading to the conclusion that the district court did not err in denying the acquittal motion for Count III.