# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 17 71

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Ja m ie Davi d Har ve y

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - St. Pa ul

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 29 , 20 16 Fil ed : Ap ril 28 , 20 16 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re SM ITH, BENTON, an d KELLY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Ja m ie Dav id Harv ey ap pe al s th e fif te en -y ear se nt en ce he rece i v e d aft er pl ead in g gu il ty to be in g a fel on in po ss es si on o f a f i rear m

. The di st ric t co ur t 1

The Hon or ab le Jo hn R. Tun he im
, Ch ie f Ju dg e, U nit ed St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1 th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta

.de te rm in ed th at Harv ey ha d th ree pr io r co nv ic ti on s fo r “ vi ol en t fel on ie s,” as th at te rm

is de fin ed in 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(B)
, an d was the refo re sub ject t o th e fif

te en -y ear

m an da to ry

m in im um sen te nc e p ro vi de d fo r by 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e)( 1)

.

Harv ey co nc ed es th at on e of th es e th ree con vi ct io ns was fo r a vi ol en t felo ny, bu t arg ue s th at th e ot he r two – b o t h f o r vi ol at in g su bd iv is io n 1 of Mi nn es ot a’s

se co nd -d eg ree as sa ul t st at ut e – were no t. Tha t su bd iv is io n cri m in al iz es “ as sa ul t[i ng ]

a n o t h e r wit h a da ng ero us weap on .” Mi nn

. St at

. § 60 9.2 22
, su bd

. 1. “ Ass au lt
, ” i n
tu rn , is de fin ed as ei th er “ an act do ne wit h in te nt to cau se fear in an o t h e r of im m ed ia te bo di ly ha rm or de at h” or “ th e in te nt io na l in fli ct io n of or at te m pt to in fli ct bo di ly harm

up on an ot he r.” Mi nn . Sta t. § 60 9.0 2, s ub d. 1 0.

The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at su bd iv is io n 1 of Mi n n es ot a’s se co nd -d eg ree

as sa ul t st at ut e is a vi ol en t fel on y be cau se , un de r ei th er de fin it io n of “ as sa ul t,” it “ ha s

as an el em en t th e us e, at te m pt ed us e, or th reat en ed us e of ph y si cal fo rce aga in st th e
pe rs on of an ot he r.” 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) (i)

. Harv ey arg ue s th at th e of fen se do es

no t qu al ify as a vi ol en t fel on y pu rs ua nt to § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) (i) un de r ei th er de fin it io n of

as sa ul t.

Harv ey ’s arg um en t wit h res pe ct to th e fir st de fin it io n o f as sa ul t is th at it is
po ss ib le to cau se so m eo ne to fe ar im m ed ia te bo di ly ha rm or de at h wit ho ut th reat en in g th e us e of ph y si cal fo rce ag ai ns t th em

. Thi s argu m en t is fore cl os ed by ou r de ci si on in Uni te d St at es v. Sch affe r, No. 15 -2 57 1, 20 16 W L 14 25 83 4 (8 th Ci r

. A p r

. 1 2
, 20 16 ). The re, w e he ld th at a co nv ic ti on fo r co m m it ti ng an “ act wit h in te nt to cau se fear in an ot he r of im m ed ia te bo di ly ha rm or de at h” in vi ol at io n of Mi nn es ot a St at ut es § 60 9.2 24 2, su bd

. 1( 1) qu al ifi ed as a v i o l e n t fel on y as de fin ed in 18 U.S.C. § 92 4 ( e ) ( 2 )(B) (i)
, be cau se th e of fen se “ ha [d ] as an el em en t th e th reat en ed us e of ph y si cal fo rce ag ai ns t th e pe rs on o f an ot he r.” Id

. at *2 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s

om it te d)

. W e se e no ba si s to tre at th e vi rtu al ly id en ti cal la ng ua ge in Mi nn es ot a St at ut es § 6 09 .02 , su bd . 10 (1 ) di ffer en tl y

.

-2

-Harv ey ’s arg um en t wit h res pe ct to the se co nd de fin it io n of as sa ul t is fo recl os ed

by Uni te d St at es v. Ri ce, 81 3 F.3 d 70 4 (8 t h C i r. 20 16 ). Harv ey arg ue s th at “ th e in te nt io na l in fli ct io n of

, or at te m pt to in fli ct bo di ly ha rm ” co ul d be acco mp l i s h ed wit ho ut th e us e or at te m pt ed us e of ph y si cal fo rce th ro ug h th e ad m in is tra ti on of
po is on or th e us e of in fect ed bo di ly flu id s. Bu t as Sch affe r ex pl ai ne d, “ [o ]ur de ci si on in Uni te d St at es v. Ri ce reject ed a si m il ar arg um en t by reas on in g th at ev en th ou gh th e
act of po is on in g a dr in k do es no t in vo lv e ph y si cal fo rce, th e act of em pl oyin g po is on kn owi ng ly as a d ev ic e to cau se ph y si cal ha rm do es .” Sch affe r, 20 16 W L 14 25 83 4,

at *2 (qu ot in g R ic e, 81 3 F .3d at 7 06 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d)

.

W e aff irm th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-