United States v. King

── United States v. King ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: April 21, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 25-5014 Document: 51 Date Filed: 04/21/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 21, 2026 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. No. 25-5014 ADAM JOSEPH KING, Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (D.C. No. 4:24-CR-00081-JDR-1) _________________________________ Jared T. Guemmer, Assistant Federal Public Defender (Julia L. O’Connell, Federal Public Defender, with him on the briefs), Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Oklahoma, appearing for Appellant. Elliot Anderson, Assistant United States Attorney (Clinton J. Johnson, United States Attorney, with him on the brief), Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Oklahoma, appearing for Appellee. _________________________________ Before MATHESON, EBEL, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ MATHESON, Circuit Judge. _________________________________ A federal grand jury indicted Adam Joseph King for Aggravated Sexual Abuse of and Abusive Sexual Contact with a Minor Under 12 in Indian Country. The  Appellate Case: 25-5014 Document: 51 Date Filed: 04/21/2026 Page: 2 indictment included two sets of alternate charges. Counts One and Two charged Mr. King as a non-Indian with an Indian victim under 18 U.S.C. § 1152. Counts Three and Four charged him as an Indian of the same crimes under 18 U.S.C. § 1153. Mr. King moved to dismiss the indictment for multiplicity or to require the prosecution to elect which charges it wished to pursue at trial. The district court denied the motion. The case proceeded to trial, and the court instructed the jury that it could convict Mr. King as a non-Indian or as an Indian, but not both. The jury found Mr. King guilty on Counts One and Two. On appeal, Mr. King argues (A) the evidence was insufficient to prove (i) the victim was an Indian or (ii) that he was a non-Indian and (B) the district court erred on the multiplicity issue. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND A. Legal Background Under the General Crimes Act, “the general laws of the United States as to the punishment of offenses committed in any place within the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the United States . . . shall extend to the Indian country.” 18 U.S.C. § 1152; see Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, 597 U.S. 629, 639 (2022). This statute does not extend, however, to “offenses committed by one Indian against . . . another Indian,” 18 U.S.C. § 1152, nor to offenses committed by a non-Indian against another non-Indian, United States v. McBratney, 104 U.S. 621, 623-24 (1881). Section 1152 therefore applies only if the defendant was a non-Indian and the victim was an Indian, or vice versa. United States v. Walker, 85 F.4th 973, 979 (10th Cir. 2023). 2  Appellate Case: 25-5014 D