920 F.3d 1168
8th Cir.2019Background
- In the early morning, Davenport police responded to a disturbance in a high gun‑crime area and saw Alvin Houston, who fled when officers approached; one officer reported seeing a black pistol in Houston’s hand.
- Officers chased and detained Houston in his backyard; during a pat‑down an officer felt a hard metallic object and removed brass knuckles.
- Officers recovered a black pistol in a ravine beyond Houston’s property line after the detention.
- Houston was later found to be a felon and indicted under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) for felon in possession of a firearm.
- Houston moved to suppress the pistol and items seized from his person; the district court denied suppression.
- At sentencing the district court applied a four‑level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possession of a firearm “in connection with another felony offense” (Iowa aggravated misdemeanor for carrying a dangerous weapon). Houston appealed; the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Houston) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the officer’s command to “wait” constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure requiring reasonable suspicion | The command was a seizure and lacked reasonable suspicion | Pursuit or a shouted command before submission is not a seizure; no Fourth Amendment triggered until submission | Court held no seizure at command; pursuit alone is not a Fourth Amendment seizure (affirmed) |
| Lawfulness of pat‑down and removal of brass knuckles and other pocket items | The searches exceeded Terry authority and items were unlawfully seized | Flight in a high‑crime area, nighttime, and observation of a pistol gave reasonable suspicion; pat‑down for weapons lawful; removal of metallic object lawful; subsequent search incident to arrest lawful | Court held pat‑down and removal lawful under Terry; even if pocket seizures erred, error harmless to firearm charge |
| Suppression of the pistol found in ravine (abandonment vs. curtilage) | The ravine was curtilage to the home; officer’s warrantless search violated Fourth Amendment | Houston abandoned the pistol; ravine lay beyond property line and was not curtilage | Court held Houston abandoned the pistol and ravine was not curtilage; suppression denied |
| Applicability of U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) four‑level enhancement | The Iowa offense is not an “another felony” because it’s necessarily committed with the federal offense (double counting) | Iowa aggravated misdemeanor qualifies as “another felony” punishable by >1 year; precedent permits enhancement | Court applied precedent (Walker) and affirmed the four‑level enhancement |
Key Cases Cited
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (pursuit or shouted command is not a seizure until submission)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (flight in a high‑crime area supports reasonable suspicion)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (stop‑and‑frisk standard)
- United States v. Bearden, 780 F.3d 887 (standard of review for suppression denials)
- United States v. Hanlon, 401 F.3d 926 (officer may retrieve suspect’s pocket item felt during frisk if could be weapon)
- United States v. Mathias, 721 F.3d 952 (curtilage analysis)
- Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (standing and abandoned property principles)
- United States v. Walker, 771 F.3d 449 (U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) application to Iowa § 724.4(1))
- United States v. Lindquist, 421 F.3d 751 (double‑counting concerns in related guideline contexts)