United States v Jim

Jim appealed his conviction for aggravated sexual abuse and the government appealed his sentence. The panel affirmed the conviction and remanded for resentencing. It held that Jim validly waived his rule of evidence 410 protections as part of his plea agreement, that his withdrawal of the guilty plea did not undo the waiver and the plea agreement itself was voluntary and knowing as his plea agreement informed him that he was waiving his right to a trial and Jim had previously pled guilty and thus was familiar with the rights waived by a guilty plea. The panel remanded for resentencing as the district court erred in not considering whether the victim suffered serious bodily injury under the general definition in the enhancement as nothing in the enhancement language excludes rape cases from its scope.