United States v. Larry Davis, 753 F.3d 1361

Defendant Larry Davis convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) for being a felon in possession of a firearm.
At sentencing the government presented evidence that Davis participated with an unknown person in a fatal shooting.
The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Davis possessed a firearm while participating in a homicide and applied the U.S.S.G. § 2A1.1 first-degree murder cross-reference.
Application of § 2A1.1 produced an offense level of 43 and a Guidelines range of life imprisonment, but the district court imposed the statutory maximum of 120 months.
Davis appealed, arguing the cross-reference required a jury finding under Alleyne/Apprendi principles.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the § 2A1.1 cross-reference required a jury to find the underlying homicide facts	Davis: Alleyne/Apprendi require any fact that increases punishment to be submitted to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt	Government: The cross-reference affects Guidelines sentencing, not the statutory maximum/minimum, so judge may find facts by a preponderance	Court: Judge may perform fact-finding for Guideline cross-reference; Alleyne/Apprendi do not forbid judge-made findings that do not increase statutory max or mandatory minimum
Whether use of the § 2A1.1 cross-reference increased Davis's statutory maximum or mandatory minimum	Davis: Cross-reference effectively increased exposure and thus triggers jury right	Government: Application did not increase statutory max or mandatory min under Apprendi/Alleyne	Court: Application did not raise statutory maximum or mandatory minimum; constitutional jury trial protection not implicated

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (any fact that increases penalty beyond statutory maximum must be submitted to jury)
Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (facts that increase mandatory minimum are elements for jury)
United States v. Hoffman, 707 F.3d 929 (8th Cir. standard of review for Guidelines interpretation)