United States v. William Allen Jones, Jr.
580 F.2d 219, 49 A.L.R. Fed. 904, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 9885 (1978)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In a criminal case, an appellate court cannot take judicial notice of an adjudicative fact that is an essential element of the crime for the first time on appeal. Federal Rule of Evidence 201(f), which permits judicial notice at any stage, is limited by Rule 201(g), which preserves the jury's right to accept or reject any judicially noticed fact.
Facts:
- William Allen Jones, Jr. was estranged from his wife.
- Jones intercepted telephone conversations of his estranged wife by tapping her phone.
- The telephone Jones tapped was furnished by South Central Bell Telephone Company.
- At trial, the government offered no evidence to prove that South Central Bell was a 'person engaged as a common carrier in providing or operating... facilities for the transmission of interstate or foreign communications,' which was an essential element of the wiretapping offense.
Procedural Posture:
- The United States indicted William Allen Jones, Jr. in federal district court for illegal wiretapping.
- A jury in the district court returned a guilty verdict on three counts of the indictment.
- Jones's counsel filed a post-verdict motion for a new trial, arguing the government's proof was insufficient.
- The district court judge construed the motion as one for judgment of acquittal and granted it, overturning the jury's verdict.
- The United States (appellant) appealed the judgment of acquittal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Federal Rule of Evidence 201(g) prevent a federal appellate court from taking judicial notice of an essential element of a crime for the first time on appeal, where the government failed to present evidence of that element to the jury at trial?
Opinions:
Majority - Engel, J.
Yes. Federal Rule of Evidence 201(g) prevents an appellate court from taking judicial notice of an essential element of a crime for the first time on appeal. While Rule 201(f) allows judicial notice to be taken at any stage of a proceeding, including on appeal, Rule 201(g) creates a critical distinction for criminal cases. It mandates that in a criminal case, the court must instruct the jury that it 'may, but is not required to, accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed.' The legislative history shows Congress deliberately chose this language to protect a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, ensuring the jury remains the ultimate arbiter of all facts constituting the crime. Taking judicial notice for the first time on appeal, after the jury has been discharged, would completely bypass the jury's fact-finding role and violate the express intent of Rule 201(g). Therefore, Rule 201(f)'s general provision must yield to the specific safeguard for criminal defendants in Rule 201(g).
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the conflict between subsections (f) and (g) of Federal Rule of Evidence 201, establishing a crucial protection for a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. It solidifies the principle that the prosecution bears the burden of proving every element of a crime to the jury and cannot cure a failure of proof by asking an appellate court to fill evidentiary gaps. The ruling prevents the government from using judicial notice on appeal as a safety net for incomplete trial work, thereby reinforcing the jury's constitutional role as the sole finder of fact on every element of an offense.
