Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02278/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02278-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Norman Dale Unverzagt
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2278

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Norman Dale Unverzagt, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Defendant - Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 9, 2006

 Filed: February 16, 2006 

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, HANSEN and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Norman Dale Unverzagt plead guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court1

 found that Unverzagt had

three prior convictions for “violent felonies” under the Armed Career Criminal Act,

18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). The district court imposed the mandatory minimum sentence

of 180 months under that statute. 

Appellate Case: 05-2278 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/16/2006 Entry ID: 2010560
-2-

Unverzagt appeals, arguing that two of his prior convictions were for burglaries

of commercial buildings and should not be treated as “violent felonies” for purposes

of the Armed Career Criminal Act. Unverzagt’s arguments are foreclosed by the

Supreme Court’s opinion in Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575, 599 (1990)

(holding that a categorical approach is used to determine if a prior conviction involved

statutory elements that showed “generic burglary,” i.e., unlawful entry into, or

remaining in, a building or structure with the intent to commit a crime). Unverzagt’s

arguments are also foreclosed by numerous cases from our circuit that follow Taylor

and hold that burglaries of commercial buildings are “violent felonies” under §

924(e)(1). See United States v. Smith, 422 F.3d 715, 721 (8th Cir. 2005) (“The

guidelines definition of crime of violence found in § 4B1.2 is also viewed as

interchangeable with the statutory definition of violent felony found in 18 U.S.C. §

924(e).”); United States v. Sun Bear, 307 F.3d 747, 753 (8th Cir. 2002) (holding that

attempted burglary of a commercial property qualified as a “crime of violence” under

U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2); United States v. Hascall, 76 F.3d 902, 905 (8th Cir. 1996)

(“Building or structure in this generic definition is broad enough to include both a

commercial building and a residence.”); United States v. Solomon, 998 F.2d 587, 590-

91 (8th Cir. 1993) (holding that attempted second degree robbery under Minnesota

law qualified as a “violent felony” under § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii)).

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-2278 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/16/2006 Entry ID: 2010560