United States v. Dereld Humphrey
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13728
| 8th Cir. | 2014Background
- Humphrey pleaded guilty to felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- The district court sentenced Humphrey under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) and imposed the 180-month mandatory minimum.
- The PSR identified three prior convictions as predicate offenses: first-degree assault, first-degree robbery, and armed criminal action.
- All three offenses arose from Humphrey’s conduct over two days when he was fifteen years old in December 1995.
- Humphrey argued at sentencing that the first-degree assault and first-degree robbery should count as one predicate offense because they were not on occasions different from one another.
- The district court held that the two December 10 offenses were committed on different occasions and thus counted as two predicates.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the first-degree assault and first-degree robbery predicates distinct? | Humphrey contends they were part of a continuous course of conduct. | Government asserts they were separate offenses on different occasions. | Yes; they were separate predicates. |
| Should subjective intent or juvenile status affect whether offenses are distinct predicates under ACCA? | Humphrey argues factors like joint participation and youth undermine distinct episodes. | Government argues such considerations are not required by ACCA precedent. | No; these considerations were not adopted. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Willoughby, 653 F.3d 738 (8th Cir. 2011) (crimes minutes apart can be distinct if different victims/locations)
- United States v. Deroo, 304 F.3d 824 (8th Cir. 2002) (different victims/contexts support separate episodes)
- United States v. Chappell, 704 F.3d 551 (8th Cir. 2013) (distinct episode if later murder after separate location/victim)
- United States v. Gray, 85 F.3d 380 (8th Cir. 1996) (burglaries in close proximity can be distinct episodes)
- United States v. Hamell, 3 F.3d 1187 (8th Cir. 1993) (two assaults on different victims can be distinct episodes)
- United States v. Petty, 828 F.2d 2 (8th Cir. 1987) (simultaneous robberies can count as one predicate)
- United States v. Van, 543 F.3d 963 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard: determine predicate offenses de novo)