44 F.4th 773
8th Cir.2022Background
- Donte Kent pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance and being a felon in possession of a firearm.
- The district court designated Kent a Career Offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 based on at least two prior felony convictions for crimes of violence or controlled-substance offenses.
- The two contested predicates were: (1) interference with official acts inflicting bodily injury (Iowa § 719.1(1)(d) (2013)), and (2) domestic abuse assault, second offense (Iowa § 708.2A(3)(b)).
- The legal question focused on whether the Iowa interference offense qualifies as a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines’ force clause, which requires an element of the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force.
- The court applied the categorical and (where applicable) modified categorical approaches, and considered whether the offense can be committed recklessly in light of Borden v. United States.
- The Eighth Circuit concluded that the statutory term "inflict" requires intentional, directed/aggressive action and therefore the offense cannot be committed recklessly; it is a crime of violence, so Kent is a Career Offender.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Iowa § 719.1(1)(d) (interference with official acts inflicting bodily injury) is a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines’ force clause | Gov’t: The statute’s elements require active use of force and thus meet the force clause | Kent: Borden bars offenses that can be committed recklessly; § 719.1(d) can be satisfied by reckless conduct | Held: § 719.1(d) requires "inflict," which connotes intentional, directed/aggressive action; it cannot be committed recklessly and is a crime of violence |
| Whether the court must decide if the domestic-abuse conviction is a crime of violence | Gov’t: Alternative predicate but not necessary if § 719.1(d) qualifies | Kent: Challenges remaining predicate(s) | Held: Court did not reach the domestic-abuse issue because § 719.1(d) alone made Kent a Career Offender |
Key Cases Cited
- Borden v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (2021) (Supreme Court: offenses that can be committed recklessly do not satisfy the ACCA/force-clause requirement)
- Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. 500 (2016) (divisible statutes require the modified categorical approach to identify the offense of conviction)
- United States v. Malloy, 614 F.3d 852 (8th Cir. 2010) (Eighth Circuit held earlier version of Iowa § 719.1 inflicting bodily injury constituted a crime of violence)
- United States v. Roman, 917 F.3d 1043 (8th Cir. 2019) (application of the categorical approach in the Eighth Circuit)
- United States v. Schneider, 905 F.3d 1088 (8th Cir. 2018) (defining "elements" for categorical-analysis purposes)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (identifying the limited set of documents courts may consult under the modified categorical approach)