Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03570/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03570-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert J. Lacher
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3570

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Robert J. Lacher, *

* [Unpublished]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 7, 2005

Filed: April 13, 2005

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Robert Lacher challenges the sentence the district

court1

 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a felon-in-possession charge. He argues that

(1) Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), precluded the district court from

finding that his second-degree burglary conviction of a commercial building was a

crime of violence; and (2) the conviction is not a crime of violence, and this court

Appellate Case: 04-3570 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/13/2005 Entry ID: 1890331
-2-

should revisit United States v. Hascall, 76 F.3d 902 (8th Cir.) (holding burglary of

commercial structure is crime of violence), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 948 (1996).

These arguments fail. During the pendency of this appeal, the Supreme Court

held in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738, 756, 765-67 (2005), that the

reasoning in Blakely applies to the federal Sentencing Guidelines, and therefore that

“any fact (other than a prior conviction) which is necessary to support a sentence

exceeding the maximum authorized by the facts established by a plea of guilty . . .

must be admitted by the defendant or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Thus, the Court reaffirmed that, consistent with the Sixth Amendment, a court may

find the fact of a prior conviction, see id. at 756, and the fact of a prior conviction

includes the determination whether the conviction is of a type that enhances the

defendant’s sentence, see United States v. Kempis-Bonola, 287 F.3d 699, 703 (8th

Cir. 2002). We also find that the court properly determined that Lacher’s conviction

was a “crime of violence,” see Hascall, 76 F.3d at 904 (second-degree burglary of

commercial building “involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of

physical injury to another” and is therefore a crime of violence), and only this court

en banc may revisit its holding in Hascall, see United States v. Yell, 18 F.3d 581, 583

(8th Cir. 1994). Lacher raises no argument based on Booker that the sentence

imposed was unreasonable.

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3570 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/13/2005 Entry ID: 1890331