972 F.3d 966
8th Cir.2020Background
- Davenport police had valid arrest warrants for Jerry Lee Bennett, Jr.; they followed an anonymous tip and went to 2330 West Second Street where officers were already familiar with occupants.
- Officers observed a man matching Bennett’s description exit the rear of the residence; Officer Askew, while standing on adjacent property, recognized Bennett before stepping onto the curtilage.
- Askew and partner ordered Bennett to stop; after initial refusal he complied, was arrested, and a loaded .25 Derringer was found in his back pocket.
- Bennett moved to suppress the firearm evidence, arguing the officers unlawfully entered the home’s curtilage; the district court denied the motion and Bennett pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession.
- At sentencing the government sought ACCA enhancement based on three prior Iowa convictions (willful injury; possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver; and going armed with intent); the district court declined to apply ACCA and sentenced Bennett to 110 months.
- The government cross-appealed the ACCA ruling; the Eighth Circuit affirmed both the suppression ruling and the district court’s refusal to impose ACCA’s 15-year mandatory minimum.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Bennett) | Defendant's Argument (United States) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers unlawfully entered the curtilage to arrest Bennett (Fourth Amendment) | Officers lacked reasonable belief Bennett resided at the house and thus could not enter curtilage without complying with knock-and-talk requirements | Officer Askew recognized Bennett from adjacent property and had valid arrest warrants, so stepping onto curtilage to arrest was a limited, lawful intrusion | Denied suppression; court credited Askew’s recognition before entry and held the intrusion was minimal and justified by legitimate law-enforcement objective |
| Whether Iowa’s "going armed with intent" (§ 708.8) is an ACCA "violent felony" under the force clause | § 708.8 is not a violent felony because its movement element need not be a substantial step toward using force | § 708.8 necessarily involves attempted use of physical force (government’s “attempted use” theory) and therefore qualifies | Not a violent felony; statute is indivisible and may cover conduct that does not involve use/attempted use/threatened use of physical force, so ACCA enhancement inapplicable |
Key Cases Cited
- Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1 (2013) (curtilage and limits on law-enforcement intrusion onto home premises)
- California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986) (no Fourth Amendment protection for observations from public vantage points)
- United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294 (1987) (curtilage treated as part of the home for Fourth Amendment purposes)
- United States v. Wells, 648 F.3d 671 (8th Cir. 2011) (knock-and-talk limitations and curtilage entry analysis)
- United States v. Weston, 443 F.3d 661 (8th Cir. 2006) (limited intrusion onto curtilage permissible for legitimate objectives)
- United States v. Raines, 243 F.3d 419 (8th Cir. 2001) (backyard entry permissible where officer pursued legitimate objective and intrusion was limited)
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980) (arrest warrant authority to enter dwelling where suspect lives)
- United States v. Glover, 746 F.3d 369 (8th Cir. 2014) (arrest-warrant entry into dwelling requires reasonable belief suspect resides there and is present)
- United States v. Reed, 921 F.3d 751 (8th Cir. 2019) (deck/backyard may be curtilage; entry justified if officer reasonably believes resident is present)
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010) (definition of "physical force" for ACCA)
- Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) (limits on modified categorical approach)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (categorical approach and statute divisibility analysis)
- United States v. Langston, 800 F.3d 1004 (8th Cir. 2015) (holding that, in light of Johnson, going armed with intent was not an ACCA qualifying crime)
- United States v. Alexander, 809 F.3d 1029 (8th Cir. 2016) (discussion of attempt elements in categorical context)
- Martin v. United States, 904 F.3d 594 (8th Cir. 2018) (realistic probability test for overbroad statutes under ACCA)
- United States v. Gomez-Hernandez, 300 F.3d 974 (8th Cir. 2002) (earlier observation that going armed with intent often involves attempted use of force)