Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-14-03122/USCOURTS-ca8-14-03122-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Timothy G. Ossana
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 14-3122

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Timothy G. Ossana

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau

____________

 Submitted: June 8, 2015

Filed: June 11, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Following a prior felon-in-possession conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1),

Timothy G. Ossana twice appealed a crime-of-violence determination under U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A). In United States v. Ossana

(Ossana I), 638 F.3d 895 (8th Cir. 2011), we held the initial federalsentencing record

insufficient to determine whether a prior Arizona aggravated assault conviction

Appellate Case: 14-3122 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/11/2015 Entry ID: 4284269 
qualified as a crime of violence. The underlying Arizona statute was overinclusive

and the record did not establish which subpart of the statute supported Ossana's

conviction. On remand, the district court expanded the record, applied the modified

categorical approach, and found the Arizona conviction qualified as a crime of

violence. We affirmed. See United States v. Ossana (Ossana II), 679 F.3d 733 (8th

Cir. 2012). 

After Ossana served his term of incarceration for that initial 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g)(1) conviction, authorities again discovered him in possession of a firearm. 

He pleaded guilty in the present case to another § 922(g)(1) violation and, again,

argued that the same underlying Arizona conviction did not qualify as a crime of

violence. The district court rejected the argument and sentenced him pursuant to

1

U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A). Ossana appeals.

Ossana does not rely upon newly developed law nor does he point to a statecourt record different from that presented in Ossana II. We addressed the

2

classification of the same Arizona conviction in depth in Ossana II, and Ossana raises

no new evidence nor arguments to cast doubt upon our prior holding or require a

different result. The district court in the present case properly determined that the

Arizona conviction qualifies as a crime of violence. 

We affirm the judgment of the district court. 

______________________________

The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States DistrictJudge for the

1

Eastern District of Missouri.

Ossana cites Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), but does not

2

explain how it changes the analysis from that employed in Ossana II. Having

reviewed Descamps, we do not find that it requires a different result in this appeal.

-2-

Appellate Case: 14-3122 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/11/2015 Entry ID: 4284269