and Submitted July 12, 2017 Seattle, Washington
from the United States District Court for the District of
Idaho Wiley Y. Daniel, Senior District Judge, Presiding D.C.
V. Richert (argued), Federal Defender Services of Idaho,
Pocatello, Idaho, for Defendant-Appellant.
Anne Polachek (argued), Adam C. Cullman, Allen M. Brabender,
and Aaron P. Avila, Attorneys; John C. Cruden, Assistant
Attorney General; Environment and Natural Resources Division,
United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.;
Michael J. Fica, Assistant United States Attorney, United
States Attorney's Office, Pocatello, Idaho; for
Before: Michael R. Murphy, [*] M. Margaret McKeown, and Jacqueline
H. Nguyen, Circuit Judges.
panel affirmed the defendant's jury conviction and
sentence for storage of hazardous waste in violation of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
panel held that the district court properly refused to allow
evidence of the defendant's diminished capacity because
the crime was one of general intent.
district court also did not err in applying a four-level
sentence enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2Q1.2(b)(3) for
cleanup that required a substantial expenditure.
McKEOWN, CIRCUIT JUDGE
saying goes, fences make good neighbors. But when the
neighbor collects thousands of containers of hazardous and
combustible chemicals in his yard that could explode at any
moment, a fence may not be enough to save the neighborly
relationship. Instead, the authorities need to get involved.
Spatig was charged and convicted under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA") for storing
more than 3, 000 containers of hazardous waste in his yard
without a permit. On appeal, Spatig challenges the district
court's refusal to allow evidence of his diminished
capacity, arguing that his crime is one of specific, as
opposed to general, intent. He also objects to the district
court's application of a ...