Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01191/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01191-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Larry A. Pierce
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

________________

No. 04-1191

________________

United States of America,

Appellee,

v.

Larry A. Pierce,

Appellant.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Appeal from the United States

District Court for the

Western District of Missouri.

 [PUBLISHED]

________________

Submitted: October 29, 2004

 Filed: November 9, 2004

________________

Before MURPHY, HANSEN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

________________

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea agreement, Larry Pierce pleaded guilty to possessing

anhydrous ammonia for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine, in violation

of 21 U.S.C. § 843(a)(6), and being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). In the plea agreement, the parties anticipated that the counts

would be grouped under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 3D1.2, Pierce

would have a base offense level of 30 based on being held responsible for 35-50

grams of actual methamphetamine, he would receive a 2-level enhancement under

USSG § 2D1.1(b)(1) for possessing a firearm in connection with the drug offense, he

Appellate Case: 04-1191 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/09/2004 Entry ID: 1831883 
1

 The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri.

-2-

would receive a 3-level reduction under USSG § 3E1.1 for acceptance of

responsibility, and he would face a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.

The presentence report also calculated that Pierce’s maximum prison sentence

would be 10 years, although his Guidelines range was higher. At sentencing,

however, the district court1

 noticed that this was an error: the parties and the

probation officer had overlooked USSG § 5G1.2, which governs sentencing on

multiple counts of conviction. The district court adjourned the sentencing hearing to

allow the parties and the probation officer to research this issue. The probation

officer filed an addendum acknowledging his error and noting that, under § 5G1.2(d),

the sentence on the drug count and the sentence on the firearm count had to run

consecutively to the extent necessary to achieve the total punishment determined

under the Guidelines. As such, Pierce’s maximum prison sentence would be 10 years

on each count, for a total of 20 years.

As relevant to this appeal, Pierce raised two objections to the presentence

report. First, he disagreed with the recommendation that he should receive a 2-level

enhancement under USSG § 3C1.2 for recklessly creating a substantial risk of death

or serious bodily injury to others while fleeing from law enforcement. Second, he

argued that it was impermissible double-counting to assess the 2-level enhancement

under § 2D1.1(b)(1) for possessing a firearm in connection with the drug offense

because the same firearm formed the basis of his firearm conviction.

When sentencing reconvened two months later, the government called

Lieutenant Shawn Collie of the Buchanan County, Missouri Drug Strike Force to

testify regarding Pierce’s conduct while fleeing from law enforcement. He testified

as follows. During surveillance, police observed anhydrous ammonia being loaded

Appellate Case: 04-1191 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/09/2004 Entry ID: 1831883 
-3-

into Pierce’s pickup truck. Pierce drove away, and police followed. Collie pulled his

vehicle in front of Pierce’s truck, and another officer pulled his vehicle behind

Pierce’s truck. They activated their lights and attempted to apprehend Pierce. Pierce

then rammed Collie’s vehicle with his truck two or more times before veering off and

striking parked cars. Pierce ran from his truck and was apprehended by a canine

officer. On the basis of this testimony, the district court overruled Pierce’s objection

to the § 3C1.2 enhancement.

After hearing argument, the district court also rejected Pierce’s doublecounting claim regarding the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement. Pierce’s total offense level

was 31, resulting in a Guidelines imprisonment range of 135-168 months. The

district court sentenced him to 168 months in prison–structured as a 120-month

sentence on the drug conviction and a consecutive 48-month sentence on the firearm

conviction–and three years of supervised release.

Pierce appeals, renewing the two arguments he presented below. We reject

each argument and affirm.

First, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in applying the

§ 3C1.2 enhancement because, when Pierce rammed Lieutenant Collie’s vehicle with

his truck multiple times and then collided with parked cars, he recklessly created a

substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to others. See United States v. Cook,

356 F.3d 913, 917 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review); United States v. Miner, 108

F.3d 967, 970 (8th Cir.) (applying the enhancement where the defendant rammed his

car into a police roadblock and engaged in other pursuit-related conduct that created

a substantial risk of serious injury to others), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 904 (1997).

Appellate Case: 04-1191 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/09/2004 Entry ID: 1831883 
-4-

Second, even assuming for the sake of argument that Pierce’s double-counting

claim is not foreclosed by his acknowledgment in the plea agreement that he would

receive the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement, but see United States v. Fairchild, 189 F.3d

769, 780 (8th Cir. 1999), we reject this argument on its merits after de novo review.

In calculating a defendant’s offense level for a drug conviction, it does not constitute

impermissible double-counting to apply a § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement, even though

the defendant has also been convicted under § 922(g)(1) for possessing the same

firearm. See United States v. Taylor, 248 F.3d 506, 517 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 534

U.S. 981 (2001); United States v. Gibbs, 190 F.3d 188, 216 (3d Cir. 1999), cert.

denied, 528 U.S. 1131 and 529 U.S. 1030 (2000); United States v. Campos-Banos,

86 Fed. App. 225, 227 (9th Cir. 2003) (unpublished).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, but we modify it to

correct a clerical error. The district court structured Pierce’s sentence as a 120-month

sentence on the drug conviction and a consecutive 48-month sentence on the firearm

conviction. The correct way to structure Pierce’s sentence is as a 120-month sentence

on the drug conviction and a 120-month sentence on the firearm conviction, with 48

months of the sentence on the firearm conviction to be served consecutively to

Pierce’s service of the sentence on the drug conviction. See USSG § 5G1.2,

comment. (n.1) (to the extent possible, “the total punishment is to be imposed on each

count”); United States v. Evans, 314 F.3d 329, 332 (8th Cir. 2002) (“Had the district

court applied Part 5G, it would have first imposed the statutory maximum sentence

on each count, because each was less than the total punishment. Then, applying §

5G1.2(d), the court would have made 156 months of the second 240-month maximum

sentence consecutive to the first 240-month maximum sentence, producing the

Appellate Case: 04-1191 Page: 4 Date Filed: 11/09/2004 Entry ID: 1831883 
2

Subsequent to briefing, Pierce indicated he would like to file a supplemental

brief in light of Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). The court will not

entertain briefing on Blakely issues until after the Supreme Court issues its opinions

in United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan. See Administrative Order

Regarding Blakely Cases, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, Sept.

27, 2004. 

-5-

396-month total punishment.”), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 916 (2003). We so modify the

judgment of the district court and, as modified, we affirm the judgment.2

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1191 Page: 5 Date Filed: 11/09/2004 Entry ID: 1831883