201142P.pdf   05/25/2021  United States  v.  Mario Spencer
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  20-1142
                          and No:  20-1190
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Colloton and Grasz, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Defendants forfeited any 
   objection to the Hobbs Act instruction by not asserting their objection to 
   the instruction given with the necessary specificity ; mere tender of an 
   alternative instruction does not preserve the error for appeal; the 
   defendants' challenge to the instruction given fails under plain error 
   review; the district court did not plainly err in in not sua sponte 
   granting a new trial based on the prosecutor's comments during closing 
   argument; considering all of the evidence in the case, there was no 
   reasonable probability of a different outcome if the court had not 
   permitted the allegedly improper arguments; the district court did not err 
   in imposing an obstruction-of-justice enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 
   3C1.1 where defendant Spencer made jail phone calls to a third party 
   asking her to conceal his illegal activity; the district court did not err 
   in imposing an enhancement for reckless endangerment during flight under 
   Guidelines 3C1.2 where defendant Farah drove recklessly while attempting 
   to flee as the evidence was sufficient to support the district court's 
   conclusion that Farah was the driver.