Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10370591
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Bobb
No. 10370591 · Decided April 1, 2025
No. 10370591·Ninth Circuit · 2025·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 1, 2025
Citation
No. 10370591
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 1 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 23-3748
D.C. No.
Plaintiff - Appellee, 1:21-cr-02005-MKD-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JEREMIAH BOBB,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Mary K. Dimke, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 28, 2025**
Seattle, Washington
Before: McKEOWN, GOULD, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Following a four-day trial featuring testimony from multiple minor victims,
a jury convicted Jeremiah Bobb of one count of sexual abuse of a minor in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2243(a), and one count of aggravated sexual abuse
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2241(c). As the parties are familiar
with the facts, we do not recount them here. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
1. The district court properly denied Bobb’s motion to strike a juror for
cause. That juror, a sexual assault survivor, was not actually biased. While she
acknowledged the possibility of an emotional trigger, she “commit[ted] to lay aside
[any] feelings and reach a verdict based on the evidence presented and the court’s
instructions.” United States v. Kechedzian, 902 F.3d 1023, 1027 (9th Cir. 2018)
(citation omitted). Nor is this an “extreme” or “extraordinary” case warranting a
presumption of bias. United States v. Mitchell, 568 F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir.
2009) (citation omitted). No categorical presumption exists for sexual assault
survivors. See, e.g., United States v. Miguel, 111 F.3d 666, 673 (9th Cir. 1997) (in
child sex abuse case, district court did not abuse discretion by declining to excuse
jurors who were victims of child molestation). And this juror’s experiences did not
“resemble[] the fact pattern.” United States v. Gonzalez, 214 F.3d 1109, 1114 (9th
Cir. 2000). She was not personally affected, directly or indirectly, by Bobb’s
crimes; she was not a child at the time of the assaults, which occurred over twenty
years before her jury service; she did not know any child sexual assault victims;
and there are no details suggesting the assaults were factually similar to the ones
Bobb committed.
2 23-3748
2. We reject Bobb’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge to his conviction
for aggravated sexual abuse of a child. Viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable
doubt that Bobb’s conduct satisfied 18 U.S.C. § 2241(c)’s “sexual act” element
based on Minor 2’s testimony that (1) she saw Bobb sexually assault Minor 1 “by
putting his private part in hers,” and (2) Bobb did “something like that” to her. See
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979) (sufficiency standard); 18 U.S.C.
§ 2246(2)(D) (defining a “sexual act” as “the intentional touching, not through the
clothing, of the genitalia of another person . . . with an intent to abuse, humiliate,
harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person”).
3. Bobb’s trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance. We need not
reach the issue of prejudice because counsel’s actions were within “the wide range
of professionally competent assistance.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668,
690 (1984). Bobb challenges counsel’s decision not to call an FBI agent or recall
Minor 2 to elicit testimony that Minor 2 had previously disclosed abuse by other
individuals but not Bobb. Counsel did so after learning the court would admit such
testimony but allow the Government to introduce prior consistent statements,
including Minor 2 describing Bobb “[p]utting hits [sic] private part in [hers]” after
he pulled down her pants and underwear. Such “[s]trategic choices made after
thorough investigation of law and facts relevant to plausible options are virtually
3 23-3748
unchallengeable.” Wharton v. Chappell, 765 F.3d 953, 967 (9th Cir. 2014)
(quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690).
AFFIRMED.
4 23-3748
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 1 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 1 2025 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No.
03Dimke, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 28, 2025** Seattle, Washington Before: McKEOWN, GOULD, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
04Following a four-day trial featuring testimony from multiple minor victims, a jury convicted Jeremiah Bobb of one count of sexual abuse of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 1 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Bobb in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 1, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10370591 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.