United States v. Dominic Irons
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3464
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Dominic Irons pleaded guilty in federal court to unlawful possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)).
- Presentence report identified at least three prior violent-felony convictions (2001 unlawful discharge of a firearm; 2003 unlawful use of a weapon; 2012 conviction for committing violence against another inmate under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 217.385(1)).
- District court treated the 2012 Missouri conviction as a predicate "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), triggering a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence; Irons objected.
- Irons appealed, arguing (1) the district court improperly used the modified categorical approach, (2) the Missouri statute does not qualify as an ACCA "violent felony," and (3) the conviction is not a "crime of violence" under the Sentencing Guidelines.
- The district court imposed a 180-month sentence; the Eighth Circuit reviewed the ACCA and Guidelines issues de novo and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Irons' Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly used the modified categorical approach to identify which subdivision of Mo. Rev. Stat. § 217.385 applied | The modified categorical approach was unnecessary because parties did not dispute the statutory basis for the conviction | The statute is divisible (two subdivisions) so the modified categorical approach was required to identify the specific crime of conviction | Use of the modified categorical approach was appropriate and necessary; record supports identification of subdivision 1 |
| Whether Mo. Rev. Stat. § 217.385(1) (violence against another offender) is a "violent felony" under the ACCA | Section 217.385(1) is overinclusive and could punish de minimis conduct not amounting to violent force required by ACCA | Missouri caselaw and definitions show "violence" requires exertion of physical force capable of causing injury; the statute therefore requires violent force | Conviction under § 217.385(1) satisfies ACCA's definition of "violent felony"; the statute requires use/threatened use of force capable of causing pain or injury |
| Whether the § 217.385(1) conviction is a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines | The conviction should not qualify as a Guidelines "crime of violence" because it can encompass minimal force | The ACCA and Guidelines definitions align; if predicate is a violent felony it is also a Guidelines crime of violence | The conviction is a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines (no meaningful distinction from ACCA definition) |
Key Cases Cited
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (framework for categorical approach to predicate offenses)
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (modified categorical approach applies to divisible statutes)
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 ("violent felony" requires violent force capable of causing pain or injury)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (limits on using underlying facts; clarified modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Sykes, 844 F.3d 712 (8th Cir. standard of review and ACCA analysis)
- United States v. Williams, 537 F.3d 969 (equivalence of ACCA "violent felony" and Guidelines "crime of violence")
- United States v. Bell, 840 F.3d 963 (discussing realistic probability and state-court constructions when assessing overbreadth under ACCA)