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

Defendant was convicted of three counts relating to a conspiracy to distribute human growth hormone (HGH) for unauthorized purposes and to smuggle HGH into the United States. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to admit evidence of a 1998 conviction at trial and defendant's 40 month sentence. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the 1998 conviction because it was used to prove intent and knowledge and was well supported by evidence; by applying a sophisticated means enhancement under USSG 2T3.1(b)(1); and by imposing a sentence above the advisory guidelines range and sufficiently explaining why defendant's understated criminal history justified an upward departure to 40 months. View "United States v. Patino" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence after he pleaded guilty to domestic assault by an habitual offender. The court held that defendant's sentence was not procedurally unreasonable, because the district court sufficiently explained that its decision to depart upward because defendant's criminal history category substantially underrepresented the seriousness of his criminal history. Furthermore, there was no error, much less plain error, in the district court's comments lamenting the prevalence of domestic violence on the Standing Rock reservation and surmising that defendant may have committed other acts of domestic violence where such crimes often go unreported. Finally, defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable where the district court imposed a well-supported, fully explained USSG 4A1.3 upward departure and then varied slightly downward from the revised advisory guidelines. View "United States v. Charles Eagle Pipe" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction for various crimes related to stealing funds from a medical practice while working as a bookkeeper. The court held that the district court did not err by excluding potentially exculpatory evidence regarding the medical practice's destruction of financial records where the records were of limited probative value and the destruction of the documents also had limited probative value. View "United States v. Espejo" on Justia Law

Defendant appealed his conviction and sentence for producing child pornography. The Eighth Circuit held that the district court did not err in denying defendant's request for an instruction on the lesser-included offense of possession of child pornography; the district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendant's motion for a mistrial where the prosecutor told the jury in closing argument that the jury was the "voice" for the victim, because the improper comments were not so prejudicial as to deprive defendant of a fair trial; but the district court erred by imposing an obstruction of justice enhancement under USSC 3C1.1. Accordingly, the court remanded for resentencing. View "United States v. Gomez-Diaz" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for wire fraud, filing for bankruptcy for the purpose of executing a scheme to defraud, and making false statements in relation to bankruptcy proceedings. The court rejected defendant's contention that the district court erred in denying his pretrial motion to sever the wire fraud counts from the bankruptcy-related counts, and held that joinder was appropriate here because the offenses were all connected to the common scheme. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to sever counts for trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 14; the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence; the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's post-trial motions to continue sentence and dismiss the superseding indictment; and the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing sentencing enhancements for the amount of loss, use of sophisticated means, and abuse of a position of trust. View "United States v. Reichel" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that the district court did not err in determining that defendant committed the Iowa felony of harboring a runaway; in imposing a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) where he used his firearm to facilitate the Iowa felony; and in imposing an upward variance based on defendant's extensive criminal history and the need to protect the public. View "United States v. Mathis" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction of possession of a firearm by an alien unlawfully in the United States after having been previously convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. The court held that, although defendant should have been allowed to introduce an officer's testimony regarding her conversation with defendant's wife for impeachment purposes, the district court's error was harmless because the government introduced substantial evidence of defendant's guilt. The court also held that there was no prosecutorial misconduct where there was no improper burden shifting during closing arguments. View "United States v. Naholi" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence after she pleaded guilty to second degree murder. The court held that the district court clearly considered potential sentence disparity and weighed the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors in justifying the sentence imposed in light of the seriousness of the offense. In this case, the district court considered defendant's need for treatment, the interest in deterring similar criminal conduct, and the need to protect the public from further crimes. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in varying upward. View "United States v. Wisecarver" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction for one count of sex trafficking of a minor under the age of 18, one count of sex trafficking of a minor under the age of 14, and three counts of distribution of crack cocaine to a person under the age of 21. The court held that the district court did not err in limiting defendant's cross-examination of one of the victims; in excluding evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 412 that the victims of defendant's sex trafficking continued to exchange sex for crack after his arrest, because defendant failed to give notice of his intent to introduce the evidence and the evidence was inadmissible as irrelevant; and there was no error in admitting other bad acts evidence. View "United States v. Betts" on Justia Law

The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana, interference with commerce by robbery (or a Hobbs Act robbery), using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug-trafficking offense or a crime of violence, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant's crimes stemmed from a robbery and shooting of an individual from whom defendant had arranged to purchase a large amount of marijuana.The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of the crimes; because the court affirmed defendant's conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, which was undisputedly a drug-trafficking offense, the predicate offense necessitated by 18 U.S.C. 924(c) was satisfied without regard to whether a Hobbs Act robbery qualified as a crime of violence; and, although defendant's 150 month sentence exceeded the 60 month statutory maximum based upon the quantity of marijuana involved, defendant failed to show the prejudice required to vacate his sentence. View "United States v. Williams" on Justia Law