United States v. Randall Steward, 880 F.3d 983

Defendant Randall Steward pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of a child (18 U.S.C. § 1591) and objected at sentencing to treating a prior Oklahoma voluntary manslaughter conviction as a "crime of violence."
District court classified the prior Oklahoma voluntary manslaughter conviction as a crime of violence and applied the Sentencing Guidelines then in effect, designating Steward a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1; range 151–188 months; sentenced to 151 months.
The Guidelines’ definition of "crime of violence" was amended between Steward’s offense and sentencing: the pre-2016 version contained a residual clause; the 2016 amendment removed the residual clause and expressly enumerated manslaughter.
Because of the Guideline change, the court examined both the 2015 and 2016 versions to avoid Ex Post Facto problems; if the prior offense qualifies under both, no constitutional issue arises.
The court held Oklahoma voluntary manslaughter fits the 2015 residual-clause standard because the Guidelines’ commentary expressly lists manslaughter as an illustrative offense, and it also fits the 2016 enumerated list and the generic federal definition.
Judgment: the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s sentence and career-offender classification.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Oklahoma voluntary manslaughter is a "crime of violence" for career-offender classification	Steward: prior conviction does not categorically qualify as a crime of violence	Government: the conviction qualifies—under 2015 residual-clause commentary and 2016 enumerated list—and matches the generic federal definition	Held: Yes; manslaughter is listed in the 2015 commentary (residual clause) and is explicitly enumerated in 2016, and Oklahoma law matches the generic definition; conviction is a crime of violence
Whether applying the Guidelines as used at sentencing would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause	Steward: applying changed Guidelines could increase punishment in violation of Ex Post Facto if conviction only qualifies under one version	Government: conviction qualifies under both pre- and post-amendment versions, so no ex post facto problem	Held: No Ex Post Facto violation because the prior offense qualifies under both versions; sentence affirmed

Peugh v. United States, 569 U.S. 530 (2013) (use Guidelines in effect on sentencing unless amendment would increase range creating Ex Post Facto issue)
Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (held ACCA residual clause unconstitutionally vague)
Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017) (Guidelines are not subject to vagueness challenge)
Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993) (Guidelines commentary is authoritative unless inconsistent with statute or constitution)
United States v. Kosmes, 792 F.3d 973 (8th Cir. 2015) (relying on Guidelines commentary to treat manslaughter as enumerated offense for categorical analysis)
Moncrieffe v. Holder, 569 U.S. 184 (2013) (categorical approach requires state offense necessarily match generic federal crime)
Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (distinguishing elements from means for categorical analysis)
United States v. Rice, 813 F.3d 704 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review: de novo interpretation/application of Guidelines)
United States v. Roblero-Ramirez, 716 F.3d 1122 (8th Cir. 2013) (discussion of categorical matching)
United States v. Peterson, 629 F.3d 432 (4th Cir. 2011) (Model Penal Code as persuasive evidence of generic manslaughter)