Justia U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that defendant's three prior Minnesota first degree aggravated robbery convictions qualified as violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act. The court explained that Minnesota aggravated robbery is an indivisible offense that includes the lesser included offense of simple robbery and is therefore categorically a violent felony. View "United States v. Redditt" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's revocation sentence after he violated the terms of his supervised release. The court held that a revocation sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3583(e) does not violate defendant's constitutional rights; defendant failed to demonstrate that the district court judge was impartial and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for recusal; the evidence was sufficient to show that defendant violated the conditions of his release by failing to reside at his residential re-entry center and by eluding the police; even if the district court's conclusion that defendant's conduct amounted to eluding the police was incorrect, the error did not affect defendant's sentence and was harmless; and the revocation sentence was neither procedurally unsound or substantively unreasonable. View "United States v. Kenton Eagle Chasing" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of ammunition. The court held that defendant failed to meet his burden to prove that his substantial rights were affected by the Rehaif error. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the government to present photos of individual frames of the surveillance video and there was no Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16 violation. Finally, the court held that defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable where the district court carefully considered the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors, including both the mitigating and aggravating factors. View "United States v. Crumble" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that the district court did not err by applying a four-level enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with another felony offense under USSG 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) & cmt. n.14(c), and a two-level enhancement for recklessly creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to another person in the course of fleeing from a law enforcement officer under USSG 2A1.4 cmt. n.1. The court also held that the district court did not err in finding defendant's prior Iowa controlled substance conviction was an enhancing predicate. View "United States v. Esquibel" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The court applied the Supreme Court's analysis in Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692, 705 (1981), and Bailey v. United States, 568 U.S. 186, 200 (2013), holding that defendant's brief detention was permissible and that the police had valid justifications for the detention. In this case, the officers' brief detention of the vehicle's passengers and approach of the car were constitutionally permissible; during the approach, the officers developed probable cause to search the car when they smelled marijuana and saw defendant's furtive movements; and thus the brief seizure and subsequent search of the vehicle based on probable cause was constitutional. View "United States v. Freeman" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit held that the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for conspiracy to retaliate against a witness. The court held that a reasonable jury could believe that defendant and her co-defendants formed a conspiracy where a reasonable jury could understand a certain conversation between defendant and her sister as evidence of a knowing agreement between them to retaliate against the new interim executive director that replaced defendant at the not-for-profit for providing evidence to federal investigators. Furthermore, a reasonable jury could conclude that overt acts were taken in furtherance of the conspiracy. View "United States v. Colombe" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that the district court did not err by imposing sentencing enhancements for possessing three to seven firearms and possessing a firearm capable of accepting a high capacity magazine. In this case, the evidence was sufficient to show constructive or joint possession, if not actual possession of the firearms. The court also held that the district court did not err by imposing an enhancement for possession of the firearm in connection with another felony offense where the firearm facilitated or had the potential of facilitating drug possession. Finally, the court held that any error in imposing any of the enhancements was harmless because the district court expressly stated it would have adopted the sentence regardless of its rulings on the enhancements. View "United States v. Fisher" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 or more grams of methamphetamine. The court rejected defendant's claim of evidentiary error in admitting Exhibit 113, a chart showing records of all contacts between phone numbers identified with defendant and others. The court held that, even if the exhibit was admitted without proper foundation, the error was harmless. Furthermore, like Exhibit 113, the contents of Exhibits 114 and 125 duplicate other evidence and testimony and any error in admitting them was harmless.The court also held that the district court did not err by applying a sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice for threatening a witness; defendant's 300 month sentence was substantively reasonable; and the district court did not abuse its discretion in varying downward from the guidelines. View "United States v. Vera-Gutierrez" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that defendant's contention that his three prior Minnesota robbery convictions did not qualify as violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act is foreclosed by Eighth Circuit decisions issued while his appeal was pending. The court also held that defendant's challenge to his conviction, contending that his indictment violated his due process rights, falls within the scope of the appeal waiver in his knowing and voluntary plea agreement, and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. View "United States v. Jackson-Bey" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and possessing a firearm as a felon. The court held that defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim requires him to develop facts outside of the record before the court and so the court declined to review it; hearsay testimony about the ownership of the gun was properly admitted under the invited error doctrine; defendant has not shown that any Rehaif error affected his substantial rights; defendant's sentence was not procedurally unreasonable where the district court explained its decision to give defendant a sentence at the top of his guidelines range; and defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable where the district court did not abuse its discretion and considered the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. View "United States v. Harris" on Justia Law