United States v. Jaterrius Greer, 57 F.4th 626

Greer pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of ammunition after he shot T.R. inside the Brady Mart convenience store in Davenport, Iowa.
Store surveillance video showed Greer retrieve a pistol, turn toward T.R., and fire at least four shots from about 4–5 feet, striking T.R.; bystanders were terrorized; T.R. later fired back.
Police found Greer wounded near the store; Greer admitted knowingly possessing the ammunition, that it traveled in interstate commerce, and that he had prior felony convictions.
The PSR cross-referenced Greer’s §2K2.1 offense to the attempted first-degree murder guideline (§2A2.1) under §2X1.1, producing a guidelines range of 168–210 months, reduced to a 120-month statutory maximum sentence.
The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Greer acted with malice aforethought and premeditation and that there was no self-defense, overruled Greer’s objection, and imposed 120 months.
On appeal, the Eighth Circuit reviewed the factual findings for clear error, affirmed the cross-reference and sentence, and held any guidelines error harmless because the district court adequately explained a §3553(a)-based alternative rationale for the statutory maximum.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ammunition possession may be cross-referenced to attempted first-degree murder under U.S.S.G. §2K2.1(c)(1)(A) and §2X1.1	Greer: Events unfolded too quickly for the specific intent/premeditation required for attempted first‑degree murder	Government/District Ct.: Video shows targeted, repeated close-range shots demonstrating specific intent and rapid premeditation	Cross-reference appropriate; district court did not clearly err in finding intent and premeditation
Whether Greer acted in self-defense, negating the cross-reference	Greer: He believed something was about to happen based on T.R.’s appearance and acted to defend himself	Government/District Ct.: Video shows Greer was the aggressor who fired first while T.R. was merely standing in line	No reasonable evidence of self-defense; district court’s rejection of the claim not clearly erroneous
If cross-reference was erroneous, whether the error was harmless	Greer: Incorrect cross-reference would materially affect sentencing and warrant correction	Government/District Ct.: Even if guidelines scoring was wrong, the court thoroughly addressed §3553(a) and stated it would impose the same 120‑month sentence	Any guidelines error harmless — district court gave an adequate alternative §3553(a) justification for the statutory maximum

United States v. Williams, 41 F.4th 979 (8th Cir. 2022) (close-range repeated shots support intent to kill)
United States v. Mattox, 27 F.4th 668 (8th Cir. 2022) (aggressor conduct undercuts self-defense claim)
United States v. Clark, 999 F.3d 1095 (8th Cir. 2021) (clear-error standard for sentencing fact findings)
United States v. Slader, 791 F.2d 655 (8th Cir. 1986) (premeditation can be formed in a short time)
United States v. Tunley, 664 F.3d 1260 (8th Cir. 2012) (self-defense recognized as a basic justification)
United States v. Milk, 447 F.3d 593 (8th Cir. 2006) (self-defense requires reasonable belief of imminent substantial risk)
United States v. Dean, 823 F.3d 422 (8th Cir. 2016) (harmless-error framework when district court provides alternative §3553(a) reasoning)