United States v. Jackson
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 9483
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Ronald Jackson, a St. Louis police officer, pleaded guilty to theft of federal-government property under 18 U.S.C. § 641.
- At sentencing, the district court added eight levels for possession of a dangerous weapon in connection with the offense and two levels for role in organizing the theft, under U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(13)(B) and § 3B1.1(c).
- The offense involved Jackson and a co-defendant, Brezill, seizing electronics from a woman (Jane Doe) and later dividing the stolen items.
- Total value of the government property stolen was $1,480.35; Jackson received and shared portions with an informant while Brezill kept some items for himself.
- Jackson argued there was no nexus between the firearm carried during the theft and the offense, and that he was an equal participant, not a leader, thus challenging both enhancements.
- The district court sentenced Jackson to 18 months in prison, at the low end of the Guidelines range, and Jackson appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 2B1.1(b)(13)(B) applies given nexus between firearm and theft | Jackson contends the firearm was unrelated to the theft and thus not connected. | Jackson asserts no nexus; weapon was incidental to uniform and duty. | Yes, the weapon was in connection with the theft; firearm displayed authority. |
| Whether § 3B1.1(c) applies for leadership/organizational role | Jackson claims he was an equal participant, not an organizer or leader. | Jackson emphasizes lack of greater role beyond Brezill; disputes enhancement. | Yes, district court did not err; Jackson planned, recruited, decided sharing, and led the offense. |
| Whether uncharged conduct evidence influenced the sentence under Booker | Jackson argues court punished him for uncharged conduct. | Government relied on uncharged conduct for context; Booker makes guidelines advisory. | No reversible error; uncharged conduct may be considered when guidelines are advisory. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bastian, 603 F.3d 460 (8th Cir. 2010) (guidelines enhancements reviewed de novo with factual finding for clear error)
- United States v. Red Elk, 426 F.3d 948 (8th Cir. 2005) (uncharged conduct may be considered when Guidelines are advisory)
- Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (Supreme Court 1991) (display of weapons can press for compliance; authority signals)
- United States v. Brave Thunder, 445 F.3d 1062 (8th Cir. 2006) (Booker considerations when guidelines are advisory)
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court 2005) (Guidelines advisory; district court may consider non- Guidelines information)