United States v. Boyles

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995 · Evidence

57 F.3d 535 (7th Cir. 1995)

Updated August 22, 2026

Evidenceplain errorwaiverforfeiturejury instructionsmens reavoluntary intoxicationreasonable mistake as to consent

Facts

Tomow testified that Boyles drove her and her three-year-old son to a remote area on the Menominee Reservation, physically assaulted her, threatened to kill her and her son, and forcibly sexually assaulted her several times. A doctor found bruises, scrapes, and dirt, sand, and grass on and around her body consistent with the assault she described, and tire tracks at the scene matched Boyles's car; Tomow's belongings were also found in his car. Boyles testified that the sex was consensual and that any injuries resulted from a later altercation near the tavern, but he had previously given a written statement denying intercourse. The government also presented videotaped testimony from the child witness after a pretrial hearing at which a psychologist testified that testifying in Boyles's presence would cause the child emotional trauma.

Issue

Whether the district court committed reversible error by failing to give unrequested jury instructions on voluntary intoxication, mistake as to consent, and a lesser included offense; by allowing videotaped testimony from the child witness; and by not ruling on Boyles's attempt to introduce evidence of prior consensual sex. Also, whether Boyles was denied a fair trial, received ineffective assistance of counsel, or received an unlawful or unreasonable sentence.

Rule

Unpreserved objections to jury instructions and evidentiary rulings are reviewed only for plain error, and reversal is warranted only for errors affecting substantial rights and seriously affecting the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. A voluntary-intoxication instruction is warranted only if there is evidence that intoxication so impaired the defendant that he was incapable of forming the required intent. Under the elements test, an offense is lesser included only when all of its statutory elements are a subset of the greater offense's elements. Videotaped testimony from a child witness may be used when case-specific findings show the child would be unable to testify in open court because of fear or would likely suffer emotional trauma, particularly from the defendant's presence. Evidence of a victim's prior sexual behavior with the accused must comply with Rule 412's procedural requirements, including a written motion and in camera process.

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a federal sexual-abuse trial in Milwaukee, Devin Cross testified that he had been drinking whiskey and smoking marijuana before the encounter. He also gave the jury a detailed, step-by-step account of the evening and insisted the complainant willingly participated. Defense counsel never requested a voluntary-intoxication instruction.

On appeal, Devin argues the judge plainly erred by failing to instruct the jury sua sponte that intoxication could negate the required mens rea. What is the best answer?

Explanation. Unpreserved instructional claims are reviewed only for plain error. A voluntary-intoxication instruction is warranted only if there is evidence that intoxication was so extreme that the defendant's power of reason was suspended or he was incapable of forming the required intent. Mere proof that the defendant had been drinking or using drugs is not enough, and a detailed recollection plus a consent defense undercuts any claim of such extreme impairment. (Derived from United States v. Boyles (1995).)