Case Explained: United States of America v. Anfernee Rondeau

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-17 The Eighth Circuit affirmed Anfernee Rondeau’s conviction for aggravated sexual abuse of a minor under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2241(c), and 2246(2)(D) and his sentence of 360 months’ imprisonment. The court held that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the verdict, applying de novo review and viewing the record in the light most favorable to the government. The court found that a reasonable jury could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Rondeau knowingly engaged in a sexual act with a minor in Indian Country based on the testimony of the victim’s witness (C.W.B.), the victim (C.A.) supported by expert testimony regarding child disclosure, and forensic evidence, despite Rondeau’s intoxication defense. Regarding the admission of evidence concerning Rondeau’s refusal to complete a scheduled polygraph test, the court applied plain error review because no objection was made at trial. The court determined that any potential error in permitting Agent Kane to testify about Rondeau’s decision to stop the examination or in the government’s rebuttal argument referencing that refusal did not affect Rondeau’s substantial rights or seriously impact the fairness of the proceedings. The court reasoned that the district court provided a curative instruction, the evidence of guilt was strong and extensive independent of the polygraph references, and the government’s closing argument was a fair response to the defense’s claims regarding coercion and the nature of the unrecorded interview. Consequently, the conviction stands, and no further relief is granted. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.