United States v. Calvin Delorme

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · July 1, 2020 · No. 19-2374

Summary

The Eighth Circuit affirmed Calvin Delorme's conviction for aggravated sexual abuse, rejecting claims that the district judge should have recused himself under 28 U.S.C. § 455 due to time constraints and alleged hostility toward defense counsel, as no plain error was shown. The court upheld evidentiary rulings allowing a BIA agent to testify as a lay witness about forensic interviews under Rule 701, excluding evidence of a white pickup truck incident as irrelevant, and finding no improper opinion on guilt or violation of Rule 1002 (best evidence rule) or Rule 414(b) (notice for child molestation evidence).

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Writing for the Court
GRUENDER; COLLOTON; GRASZ
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
July 1, 2020
Docket number
19-2374
Procedural posture
Appeal from conviction after jury trial
Standard of review
Recusal claim reviewed for plain error because not raised below; preserved evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion, otherwise plain error.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Calvin Keith Delorme v. United States of America

Topics

criminal procedureevidencestandard of reviewappellate procedurepreservation of error

Practice areas

Criminal Law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Judge Moody should have recused himself due to time constraints and allegedly hostile conduct.
  2. Whether the district court abused its discretion in allowing Agent Rogers to testify as a lay witness about forensic interviews.
  3. Whether the district court abused its discretion in excluding evidence about a white pickup truck incident.
  4. Whether the district court plainly erred in allowing allegedly improper opinion testimony about guilt.
  5. Whether the district court plainly erred in not playing the video of the interview.
  6. Whether the district court plainly erred in admitting Rule 414 evidence without adequate notice.

Key quotations

The question is whether the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned by the average person on the street who knows all the relevant facts of a case. (at 3)
First, judicial rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion. (at 4)
It is fundamental that where the defendant opened the door and invited error there is ordinarily no reversible error. (at 7)
explaining that Rule 413, a rule similar to Rule 414, requires 'disclosure of the evidence itself' but not disclosure of 'the intention to rely upon Rule 413 for admissibility' (at 7)

Factual background

Delorme was responsible for watching a twelve-year-old female victim. The victim testified that Delorme sexually abused her from age six or seven, including forcing her to perform oral sex. Another man, Wyatt Azure, also sexually abused the victim and testified that Delorme had sexually abused him when he was nine years old.

Procedural history

A grand jury indicted Delorme for aggravated sexual abuse and abusive sexual contact. The government dismissed Count Two at trial. The jury convicted on Count One, and the district court sentenced Delorme to 360 months' imprisonment. He appeals.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…