192197P.pdf   07/13/2020  United States  v.  Cortez Crumble
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  19-2197
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Wollman and Kobes, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Defendant could not show his 
   substantial rights under Rehaif were affected in part because he had a 
   previous conviction for being a felon in possession of ammunition and had 
   served a 60-month sentence on the conviction; there is no reasonable 
   probability that but for the Rehaif error the outcome of the proceeding 
   would have been different and defendant had failed to meet the plain error 
   standard; the district court did not abuse its discretion by deciding not 
   to exclude under Rule 16 the government's frame-by-frame version of the 
   surveillance video previously provided to defendant; defendant's sentence 
   was not substantively unreasonable.