United States v. Maurice Jarvis
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3291
8th Cir.2016Background
- Maurice Jarvis pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- During a pat-down, police found a loaded firearm and 0.21 grams of heroin in Jarvis’s front pocket.
- The PSR recommended a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possessing the firearm "in connection with" another felony (drug possession).
- Jarvis argued the district court failed to make necessary factual findings and lacked sufficient evidence that the firearm was used "in connection with" the drug offense.
- The district court found Jarvis intentionally left home with both the heroin and a loaded firearm in the same pocket, referenced a prior drug distribution conviction involving a loaded gun, and explicitly applied the Guideline’s "facilitated or had the potential of facilitating" standard.
- The Eighth Circuit affirmed, concluding the district court applied the correct "facilitate" standard and had adequate factual support for the enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court made required factual findings to apply § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) | Jarvis: court did not make necessary findings to support enhancement | Government: court sufficiently found the firearm facilitated or could facilitate the drug felony | Court: district court made explicit findings and applied correct standard |
| Whether evidence showed the firearm was possessed "in connection with" the drug felony | Jarvis: only a user amount of heroin; coincidence likely | Government: proximity, simultaneous possession, and prior conduct support inference firearm could facilitate drug offense | Court: evidence supported inference; enhancement appropriate (possession in public with drugs and firearm "rarely" clearly erroneous) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Blankenship, 552 F.3d 703 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review and reversal where court applied only temporal/spatial nexus rather than "facilitate" standard)
- United States v. Holm, 745 F.3d 938 (8th Cir. 2014) (firearm possessed "in connection with" drugs if it facilitated or had potential to facilitate; carrying drugs plus gun in public makes enhancement rarely clearly erroneous)
- United States v. Sneed, 742 F.3d 341 (8th Cir. 2014) (reversal required when district court relies solely on temporal/spatial nexus without applying note 14(A) "facilitate" standard)
- United States v. Smith, 535 F.3d 883 (8th Cir. 2008) (determination whether firearm facilitated drug offense depends on case-specific facts)
- United States v. Swanson, 610 F.3d 1005 (8th Cir. 2010) (inference that firearm protects drugs is permissible when drug amount exceeds residue)