## Facts

- Merlin J. Bruguier, Sr. was prosecuted in federal court for aggravated sexual abuse of his 17-month-old daughter, under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2241(c), and 2246(2)(A).
- The child suffered serious injuries, including a fractured thigh bone, leg injuries, and a severe tear to the perineum.
- Bruguier claimed the injuries occurred when the family car accidentally rolled over the child.
- Medical testimony indicated it was extremely unlikely the car incident caused all the injuries, and forensic testing identified at least one sperm cell from material taken from the child.
- In an FBI interview, Bruguier made an incriminating statement admitting “inappropriate sexual contact” with the child.
- At trial, Bruguier presented character witnesses who testified he was a good father and not physically or sexually abusive.
- On cross-examination, the government asked those witnesses whether they knew of a prior Department of Social Services finding that Bruguier had neglected his children.
- A jury convicted Bruguier, and the district court sentenced him to 262 months’ imprisonment, five years’ supervised release, a $4,500 fine, and a $100 special assessment.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court erred by allowing the government to cross-examine defense character witnesses about a prior child-neglect finding after the defense presented “good father” character testimony.
2. Whether references to other negative past conduct (including arrest-related matters) and testimony about the FBI interview required reversal under the Federal Rules of Evidence or constitutional standards.
3. Whether the district court improperly coerced the jury’s verdict through its handling of deliberations.
4. Whether the district court erred in applying Sentencing Guidelines adjustments resulting in a 262-month sentence.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The court held that any challenged evidentiary rulings did not warrant reversal: some issues were not properly preserved, others were correctly decided, and any error was harmless.
- The court rejected the claim of jury coercion.
- The court upheld the Sentencing Guidelines calculations and resulting sentence.

## Legal Principles

- When a criminal defendant introduces favorable character evidence, the prosecution may rebut it by cross-examining the character witnesses about specific instances of conduct relevant to the trait placed in issue, within the limits of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
- Cross-examination that tests a character witness’s awareness of prior conduct inconsistent with the asserted character trait is generally permissible when the defense “opens the door.”
- Appellate relief requires a showing of prejudicial error; evidentiary missteps that do not substantially influence the verdict are treated as harmless, particularly where other evidence of guilt is strong.
- Failure to preserve objections at trial limits appellate review and may foreclose relief absent plain error.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit affirmed Bruguier’s aggravated sexual abuse conviction and sentence, concluding that the defense’s “good father” character evidence permitted cross-examination about a prior neglect finding and that any flaws in the government’s questioning or other trial rulings did not cause reversible prejudice.


United States v. Bruguier, 161 F.3d 1145 (8th Cir. 1998)