United States of America v. Andrew Maker

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANDREW MAKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-10180
D.C. No. 3:07-cr-00721-SI
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Susan Illston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Andrew Maker appeals from his bench-trial conviction for simple assault
within a special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, in
FILED
APR 15 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-10180 2
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(5). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
Maker contends that his conviction should be reversed because there was
insufficient evidence that the offense took place within the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
prosecution, see United States v. Stanton, 501 F.3d 1093, 1099 (9th Cir. 2007), a
rational trier of fact could have found that the offense took place within the
boundaries of Fort Mason, which Maker does not dispute is located on federal
land. See United States v. Coutchavlis, 260 F.3d 1149, 1153-54 (9th Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --