The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence of Dakota Don Briscoe, also known as 'Outlaw,' who was found guilty of a violent crime spree that left two men dead in September 2020.
The appellate court issued its order and judgment on Feb. 5, 2026, in *United States v. Briscoe* (10th Cir. 2026), rejecting Briscoe's appeal without oral argument. The three-judge panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Phillips and McHugh, along with District Judge Kathryn H. Vratil of Kansas sitting by designation, unanimously determined that oral argument would not materially assist in deciding the appeal.
According to court documents, on Sept. 7, 2020, Briscoe allegedly shot and killed two men inside a car and then set the vehicle on fire. The violent incident marked the beginning of a desperate flight from law enforcement that saw Briscoe engage in increasingly dangerous behavior.
After killing the two victims and destroying evidence by burning their car, Briscoe fled the scene on foot. Court records show he ran from house to house searching for a getaway vehicle, attempting to carjack multiple individuals. After two unsuccessful carjacking attempts, he successfully carjacked a third person's vehicle before eventually being arrested.
The case originated in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, where it was assigned case number 1:20-CR-01777-MV-1. The district court proceedings resulted in Briscoe's conviction on federal charges related to the double murder and subsequent crimes.
Briscoe's appeal to the Tenth Circuit challenged various aspects of his conviction and sentence, though the specific legal arguments raised are not detailed in the available court documents. The appellate court's decision to proceed without oral argument suggests the panel found the legal issues straightforward based on the written briefs and trial record.
The Tenth Circuit's ruling follows established federal appellate procedure. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2) and Tenth Circuit Rule 34.1(G), appellate panels may determine that oral argument would not materially assist in deciding an appeal. This procedural decision allows courts to manage their dockets efficiently while ensuring thorough review of cases.
The court's order notes that while the judgment is not binding precedent except under specific legal doctrines such as law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel, it may be cited for its persuasive value consistent with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and Tenth Circuit Rule 32.1.
The case demonstrates the federal court system's jurisdiction over violent crimes that cross state lines or involve federal property. The charges against Briscoe likely included federal offenses such as carjacking, which becomes a federal crime when it involves interstate commerce or occurs on federal property.
Briscoe's use of the alias 'Outlaw' reflects the violent nature of his criminal activities. The progression from double murder to arson to multiple carjacking attempts shows a pattern of escalating violence that posed significant danger to the community.
The successful prosecution and appeal affirmation represent the coordination between federal prosecutors and law enforcement agencies in pursuing justice for violent federal crimes. The case required substantial investigation and evidence gathering to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.
The Tenth Circuit's jurisdiction covers federal appeals from Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming. The court regularly handles criminal appeals involving violent federal offenses, providing consistent interpretation of federal criminal law across the region.
For Briscoe, the appellate court's affirmation means his conviction and sentence stand as final, barring any potential petition for Supreme Court review. The double murder conviction likely carries a substantial federal sentence, reflecting the serious nature of the crimes and the danger posed to public safety.
The case serves as an example of how federal courts handle violent crimes that involve multiple offenses across different locations. The systematic approach from investigation through appeal demonstrates the federal justice system's capacity to prosecute complex violent crimes effectively.
Moving forward, Briscoe's legal options are limited following the appellate affirmation. While defendants may petition the Supreme Court for certiorari review, the high court grants review in only a small percentage of cases, typically those involving significant constitutional questions or splits between circuit courts.