United States v. Bonnie Lee Goodner , 21 F. App'x 513 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 01-2020
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,            * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the District
    v.                                * of Minnesota.
    *
    Bonnie Lee Goodner,                     *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.           *
    ___________
    Submitted: October 19, 2001
    Filed: October 24, 2001
    ___________
    Before BYE, FAGG, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Bonnie Lee Goodner was charged with harboring a fugitive in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 1071
     when she aided her boyfriend, Michael Zimmer, in evading an arrest
    warrant. The district court* granted Goodner’s motion for a bill of particulars
    specifying Goodner’s affirmative harboring acts, but the Government mistakenly
    failed to comply with the court’s order. To remedy this error, the district court
    partially granted Goodner’s motion in limine to prevent the admission of evidence not
    *
    The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District
    of Minnesota.
    disclosed before the deadline set for the bill of particulars. Arguing it had not been
    disclosed before the deadline, Goodner unsuccessfully sought to exclude testimony
    of Goodner’s admission she had been hiding Zimmer. Goodner was convicted and
    sentenced to six months imprisonment. Goodner now appeals. Having reviewed the
    record and the briefs, we affirm.
    We reject Goodner’s contention the district court abused its discretion by
    admitting Goodner’s admission she had been hiding Zimmer. See United States v.
    Jiminez-Perez, 
    238 F.3d 970
    , 974 (8th Cir. 2001) (standard of review). The contested
    statement provided evidence of Goodner’s intent to hide Zimmer, not evidence of an
    affirmative act of harboring, thus the district court correctly found the contested
    evidence had not been requested in the motion for the bill of particulars and was not
    prohibited by the court’s remedial order. In addition, we reject Goodner’s contention
    the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. After reviewing the evidence in
    the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, we conclude the evidence was sufficient
    to permit a jury reasonably to find Goodner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See
    United States v. Erdman, 
    953 F.2d 387
    , 389-91 (8th Cir. 1992). The record shows
    Goodner spoke with a United States Marshal regarding Zimmer’s fugitive status,
    provided Zimmer with money, her camper, and a motorcycle while officials were
    actively searching for him, and admitted she purposefully aided Zimmer in hiding
    from officials. See 
    id.
    Finding no reversible error, we affirm Goodner’s conviction and sentence. See
    8th Cir. R. 47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-2020

Citation Numbers: 21 F. App'x 513

Judges: Bye, Fagg, Per Curiam, Riley

Filed Date: 10/24/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024