818 F.3d 424
8th Cir.2016Background
- Jerry Scott was indicted on seven counts arising from three searches: May 12, 2010 (vehicle), August 20, 2010 (house), and March 26, 2012 (vehicle); charges included possession with intent to distribute PCP, felon-in-possession, and § 924(c) firearms counts.
- Officer McKenney stopped Scott on May 12 after circling back and claimed he smelled PCP and observed residue; officers found a firearm and two vials of PCP during a subsequent search; Scott moved to suppress and was denied.
- On March 26, 2012, officers stopped a black Lincoln Navigator after surveillance and a confidential informant tip; limited window visibility, an informant report that Scott sold PCP and carried a gun, prior convictions, and officers’ observations led to a search in which PCP and firearms were found; suppression motion denied.
- At trial Scott was convicted on most counts (acquitted of one § 924(c) count; convicted of lesser-included possession on one May-2010 count); the August 20, 2010 house search produced distribution-quantity PCP and mail linking Scott to the premises, supporting constructive-possession findings.
- At sentencing the district court applied the career-offender enhancement under USSG § 4B1.1 (relying in part on the Guidelines’ residual clause) and imposed a total 360-month sentence (bottom of the Guidelines range); Scott challenged suppression rulings, sufficiency of evidence on some counts, substantive reasonableness of sentence, and later the vagueness of the residual clause.
Issues
| Issue | Scott's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of May 12, 2010 stop/search | McKenney lied about smelling PCP (dashboard cam shows window up); stop lacked reasonable suspicion | Court credited officer’s testimony; odor + admissions gave reasonable suspicion/probable cause | Affirmed: factual findings credited; stop lawful and subsequent search admissible |
| Legality of March 26, 2012 vehicle search (protective sweep) | No reasonable suspicion that Scott was armed and dangerous; Long/Gant limits bar search | Tip corroboration, prior record, tinted windows, limited visibility, and CI support reasonable suspicion for a Long protective sweep | Affirmed: facts viewed collectively justified protective sweep; search lawful |
| Sufficiency of evidence for March 26 distribution and § 924(c) counts | Evidence insufficient to prove intent to distribute or that gun was in furtherance | Eyedropper, More cigarettes, vials, expert testimony, and guns near drugs support intent and § 924(c) nexus | Affirmed: evidence sufficient for convictions |
| Career-offender enhancement and sentence reasonableness | Residual clause of USSG § 4B1.2(a)(2) is unconstitutionally vague (Johnson) making career-offender finding invalid; sentence substantively unreasonable | Government concedes residual clause invalid but argues convictions independently qualify under use-of-force clause; within-Guidelines sentence reasonable | Affirmed: domestic-assault convictions qualify under the use-of-force clause per circuit precedent; sentence not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gipp, 147 F.3d 680 (8th Cir.) (odor of marijuana can supply reasonable suspicion to investigate)
- United States v. McCarty, 612 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir.) (admissions of drug use can provide probable cause to search a vehicle)
- Maryland v. Dyson, 527 U.S. 465 (1999) (automobile exception to warrant requirement)
- Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983) (vehicle protective sweep when officer reasonably suspects driver is armed and dangerous)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (limits on vehicle searches incident to arrest—but not applied where no arrest occurred)
- United States v. Mendoza, 677 F.3d 822 (8th Cir.) (clear-error standard for reviewing district court credibility findings)
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 (1985) (deference to trial-court factual findings)
- United States v. Wright, 512 F.3d 466 (8th Cir.) (deference to district court credibility determinations)
- United States v. Winarske, 715 F.3d 1063 (8th Cir.) (corroboration of minor details can support reliance on an unproven informant)
- United States v. Parish, 606 F.3d 480 (8th Cir.) (evidence linking guns and drugs can support § 924(c) convictions)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (ACCA residual clause is unconstitutionally vague; relevant to Guidelines’ residual-clause challenge)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for substantive reasonableness of sentences)