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

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence after he pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography. The court held that defendant's prior third degree sexual abuse convictions under Iowa law were prior convictions under 18 U.S.C. 2252(b)(2); a state court order correcting the 2011 Iowa Judgment and Sentence which was entered after defendant committed his federal offense in 2014 but before he was indicted did not affect the state court jury's finding of guilt; and the Corrected Judgment and Sentence, entered in 2016 long after defendant committed this federal offense, was not based on constitutional invalidity, trial error, or actual innocence. In this case, the correction did not alter the legality of the conviction or signify that defendant was innocent of the crime. View "United States v. Jepsen" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence of a urine sample that police took from him. The court held that the warrant was supported by probable cause when it was executed; the district court permissibly relied on testimony of a forensic criminalist that evidence of marijuana use in a chronic user can remain in the user's system for up to two months; and, given that defendant's girlfriend informed officers that defendant used marijuana daily, there was a fair probability that a urine sample collected on August 30 would reveal evidence of his drug use on or before August 22. View "United States v. Leick" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence after he pleaded guilty to wire fraud. The court held that the district court did not clearly err in calculating defendant's criminal history score where his prior tax-related conviction was not relevant conduct to his wire-fraud conviction. In this case, the convictions did not share victims, a common scheme, and charge in the indictment. Furthermore, the record reflected no nexus between the former and latter convictions. View "United States v. Smith" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction after he pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. The court held that the district court did not err by determining that defendant's prior Mississippi conviction for burglary was a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Therefore, the district court correctly classified defendant as a career offender. View "United States v. Silva" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's finding of a supervised release violation and revocation of defendant's sentence. The court held that the district court carefully explained objective facts and reasonable inferences supporting its finding that the witness' recantation was not credible. The court explained that it was not an improper factor to consider that the witness' recantation was influenced by family pressures, and that defendant had assaulted another woman under similar circumstances was a relevant corroborating circumstance. The court stated that when the district court concludes that a recantation was not believable, it was almost impossible for an appellate court to hold that a district judge's rejection, on credibility grounds, of the testimony of a live witness was clearly erroneous.The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing defendant's sentence, which was not substantively reasonable, where the district court carefully weighed the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) sentencing factors. View "United States v. Lillybridge" on Justia Law

Defendant appealed from the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under the First Step Act of 2018, which made retroactive the lower penalties for cocaine base offenses established by the Fair Sentencing Act. The Eighth Circuit held that the district court erred by finding that defendant was ineligible for relief. In this case, defendant's conviction for distributing two ounces of cocaine base was a covered offense under section 404 of the Act and thus he was eligible for a sentence reduction. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded. View "United States v. McDonald" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's directed verdict and the jury's verdict in favor of appellees in an action involving a dispute between landowners and herbicide damage. The court held that the district court did not err in directing a verdict against Keller Farms on it statutory trespass count. In this case, the district court properly interpreted the Missouri trespass statute to exclude Keller Farm's claim for crop damage, and the district court did not err in determining that Keller Farms had not presented sufficient evidence to make a submissible case for its statutory trespass claim concerning damage to its windbreak and ornamental trees.The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding a warning letter as well as testimony about it under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 because it was unfairly prejudicial; the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence; and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial on the ground that appellees' closing argument was improper. View "Keller Farms, Inc. v. Stewart" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence after he was convicted of three counts of receipt and distribution of child pornography and one count of failing to register as a sex offender. The court held that evidence from electronic video surveillance equipment (EVSE) did not sufficiently influence the jury, and any error in admitting the evidence was harmless. In this case, there was significant non-EVSE evidence supporting his conviction. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of defendant's prior child pornography conviction under Federal Rules of Evidence 414 and 404(b). View "United States v. Stefanyuk" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence after he conditionally pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Under the totality of the circumstances, the court held that the officer had probable cause for his search and the gun found under the floor mat was admissible. In this case, defendant was duplicitous at the traffic stop a few hours before his arrest and his sudden reach toward the floormat as the officer was escorting him from the vehicle both tend to support a finding of probable cause. View "United States v. McGhee" on Justia Law

Defendant appealed his sentence after being convicted of fraudulently registering the personal vehicles of St. Louis residents in Illinois to avoid Missouri tax. The court held that the method of calculation resulted in a loss amount that was a reasonable estimate of loss to the State of Missouri. The district court correctly applied the eight-level sentencing enhancement for a loss amount greater than $95,000 but less than $150,000 under USSG 2B1.1(b)(1)(E); the loss amount was well supported by evidence; and the loss amount was not clearly erroneous.The court also held that the district court did not clearly err by adopting the government's proposed loss amount when it imposed the restitution award. However, the record did not establish with the required clarity that the district court exercised its independent judgment in reaching its decision to impose the two-level sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice under USSG 3C1.1. Accordingly, the court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing. View "United States v. Harmon" on Justia Law