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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 7- 28 85

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
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.

Ty ro n Yo un g

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 Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 6, 2 01 8 Fi le d: Apri l 2 6, 2 01 8 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re WOL LMAN, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Ty ro n You ng pl ead ed gu il ty to b e i n g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm in
vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (1 ) an d 92 4( a)(2 ) an d was se nt en ced to 11 5 m on th s’
im pr is on m en t. He ap pe al s hi s se nt en ce, ch al le ng in g th e di st ric t co ur t ’s ad m is si on 1

The Hon or ab le Dav id Greg or y Kay s, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Unit ed St at es D istric t Co ur t 1 fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.of a co nf

id en ti al in fo rm an t’s (CI) he ars ay st at em en ts at se nt en ci ng an d it s ap pl ic at io n of th e U.S. Sen te nc in g Gu id el in es (U.S.S.G.). W e aff irm.

At ap pr ox im at el y 5: 00 a.m

. on May 11
, 20 16
, po li ce of fic ers were di sp at ch ed

to a ho m e lo cat ed at 44 46 Myrtle Ave nu e in Kan sa s Ci ty, Mi ss ou ri, whe re a fo ur te en

y ear- ol d gi rl ha d be en sh ot in th e le g. The of fic ers di sc ov ered sp en t sh el l cas in gs on th e se co nd -s to ry de ck lo cat ed ou ts id e th e vi c t i m’s be dr oo m

. The y fo un d se ve ral
bu ll et ho le s in th e be dr oo m wall s an d win do ws. Two b ul le ts were fo un d l od ge d i n th e v ic ti m ’s bed , wher e sh e h ad be en sl eep in g wh en sh e was sh ot

.

Late r th at da y , th e CI co nt act ed Dete ct iv e Jo hn St rau be l an d m ad e

arra ng em en ts to m eet wit h hi m

. W h e n t h e y met in pe rs on , th e CI rep or te d th at
You ng ’s gi rlf

rie nd h a d p i c k e d up You ng an d th e CI in a bl ack Dod ge Dart th at

m or ni ng

. Afte r dr iv in g to th e area ne ar th e vi ct im ’s ho m e, You ng an d th e CI ex it ed
th e ve hi cl e. The CI rep or te d th at th ey walk ed to th e ba ck of th e ho us e, whe re You ng cl im be d up a po le to a ba lc on y an d sh ot in to th e win do ws an d th e ho us e it se lf. You ng

an d th e CI th en ran ba ck to th e ve hi cl e an d le ft th e sc en e. Afte r th e sh oo ti ng , You ng
to ld th e CI th at he was tryin g to s h o ot Lou is Bel to n be cau se Bel to n pr ev io us ly h ad
sh ot You ng

. The CI al so rep or te d th at You ng ’s fir earm was a gr ay an d bl ack Tau ru s 9 m m . Detec ti ve Str au be l l at er p ai d t he CI $ 50 0 fo r th is in fo rm at io n.

You ng was dr iv in g a bl ack Dod ge Dart on May 16
, 20 16
, an d sp ed away whe n of fic ers tri ed to in it ia te a tra ffi c st op

. W he n o f f i cers la te r lo cat ed You ng , he

a t t e mp t e d to fle e on fo ot bu t was ap pr eh en de d. In a ne arb y y ard
, of fic ers fo u n d a lo ad ed si lv er an d bl ack Ta u r u s 9 m m se m i-a ut om at ic fir earm , whi ch You ng la te r pl ead ed gu il ty to p os se ss in g.

De t e c t i v e St rau be l, two la w en fo rcem en t of fic ers , th e vi ct im
, an d a de fen se in ve st ig at or te st ifi ed at se nt en ci ng

. The go ve rn m en t pr es en te d ph ot og rap hs
, th e

-2

-cri m e la b rep or t, an d th e st ip ul at ed te st im on y of a fo ren si c ex am in er an d a de te ct iv e

who in ve st ig at ed th e sh oo ti ng th e m or ni ng it to ok pl ace.

You ng fir st arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d by ad m it ti ng th e he ars ay
st at em en ts of th e C I a n d by rel y in g up on th os e st at em en ts to fin d th at You ng

co m m it te d th e of

fen se of co nv ic ti on in co nn ect io n wit h as sa ul t wit h in te nt to co m m it

m ur de r. Bas ed on th at fin di ng , th e di st ric t co ur t ap pl ie d a cro ss refe ren ce to U.S.S.G. § 2A2 .1, th e se ct io n th at ap pl ie s to as sa ul t wit h in te nt to co m m it m ur de r, res ul ti ng in

a hi gh er of

fen se le ve l th an he wou ld ha ve ha d wit ho ut th e cro ss refe ren c e

. See
U

. S. S. G

. § 2K 2. 1( c) (1 )(A) (cro ss refe ren ce to § 2X1 .1); U.S.S.G. § 2X1 .1(c )(1 ) (cro ss refe ren ce to of

fen s e s e c ti on th at ex pr es sl y co ve rs th e at te m pt ). Bec au se You ng ob jecte d to th e ad m is si on of th e st at em en ts , we rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s ru li ng fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n. See Uni te d St at es v. Sh eri da n, 85 9 F.3 d 57 9, 58 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ) (s ta nd ard of r ev ie w).

The Ru le s of Evi de nc e do no t ap pl y to se nt en ci ng pr oc eed in gs

. Fed

. R. Evi d.
11 01 (d )(3 ). The di st ric t cou rt is pe rm it te d to co ns id er relev an t in fo rm at io n, even if
it wou ld be in ad m is si bl e at tri al
, “ pr ov id ed th at th e in fo rm at io n ha s su ffi ci en t in di ci a of rel ia bi li ty to su pp or t it s pr ob ab le accu racy.” U.S.S.G. § 6A1 .3(a ). You ng arg ue s th at th e CI’s st at em en ts were un rel ia bl e be cau se th e CI ha d a m ot iv e to accu se You ng (an d sh ift bl am e fro m hi m se lf)
, he fai le d to res po nd to a su bp oe na , he pr ev io us ly ha d

co m m it te d bo nd an d pr ob at io n vi ol at io n s an d ha d be en co nv ic te d of a cri m e of
di sh on es ty, he ha d ab sc on de d fro m su pe rv is io n fo r th e y ear fol lo win g th e sh oo ti ng ,
an d h e was a po ss ib le co nt rib ut or of g en et ic in fo rm at io n fo un d o n t he fir earm

.

W e co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n in ad m it ti ng th e C I ’s he ars ay st at em en ts

. The CI ha d pr ov en hi m se lf rel ia bl e in th e pa st , ha v i n g

wor ke d wit h Det ect iv e St rau be l fo r th ree y ears

. W he n th e CI m et wit h St rau be l on th e sa m e da y of th e sh oo ti ng , he ga ve a de ta il ed acco un t of wha t oc cu rred du rin g th e earl y m or ni ng ho ur s of May 1 1

. H e de sc rib ed th e fir earm an d id en ti fie d You ng ’s

-3

-po ss ib le m ot iv e. Dur in g a po li ce in te rv ie w, You ng ’s gi rlf rie nd co rro bo rat ed th e CI’s

acco un t o f th e ev en ts lea di ng up to an d fo ll owi ng th e sh oo ti ng

. Sh e al so id en ti fie d
th e Tau ru s 9 m

m fir earm as be lo ng in g to You ng

. Fo ren si c ev id en ce con fir m ed th at
You ng ’s f

ire arm was t h e s o u r c e of th e bu ll et s an d sp en t cas in gs th at were fo un d at th e cri m e sc en e. You ng ’s DNA was fo un d on th e fir earm

. You ng pl ead ed gu il ty to
po ss es si ng th e fir earm , an d You ng hi m se lf to ld of fic ers th at he be li ev ed th at Bel to n ha d sh ot hi m , c or ro bo rat in g th e CI’s st at em en ts an d in di cat in g You ng ’s m ot iv e fo r sh oo ti ng Bel to n’s ho m e. In li gh t o f th e ev id en ce p res en te d, t he di st ric t co ur t fai rly
de te rm in ed th at th e CI’s st at em en ts were pr ob ab ly accu rat e an d pr op erl y ap pl ie d th e

cro ss refe ren ce. W e al so co nc lu de th at th e ad m is si on of th e CI’s st at em en ts di d no t vi ol at e You ng ’s co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s. See Uni te d St at es v. W is e, 97 6 F.2 d 39 3, 40 2 (8 th Ci r. 19 92 ) (en ba nc ) (h ol di ng th at “ th e Gui de li ne s’ st an da rd fo r th e co ns id erat io n of h e a r sa y te st im on y at se nt en ci ng m eet s th e ap pr op ria te co ns ti tu ti on al te st an d
fu lfi ll s th e Co nf

ro nt at io n Cl au se ’s ba si c pu rp o s e o f pr om ot in g th e in te gr it y of th e fact fin di ng pro ces s” ).

You ng ’s arg um en t th at th e di st r i ct co ur t erro ne ou sl y cl as si fie d hi s pr io r Mi ss o u r i c o n v ic ti on fo r at te m pt ed se co nd -d eg ree ro bb ery as a cri m e of vi ol en ce

un d e r U.S.S.G. § 2K2 .1(a )(4 )(A) is fo recl os ed

. See Uni te d St at es v. Swo pe s, 88 6
F.3 d 66 8, 67 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 18 ) (en ba nc ) (h ol di ng th at Mi ss ou ri se co nd -d eg ree ro bb ery is cat eg or ic al ly a “ vi ol en t fel on y ” un de r th e f o r c e c l a u s e of 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e));
Uni te d St at es v. Hall
, 87 7 F.3 d 80 0, 80 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ) (v ie win g “ vi ol en t fel on y ”

un de r 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e) as in te rch an ge ab le wit h “ cri m e of vi ol en ce” un de r th e Gui de li ne s)

. 2

The sen te nc e is affi rm ed

.

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

See a ls o Un it ed Sta te s v. Co ll in s, No. 17 -1 63 7, 20 18 W L 1 90 24 13 (8t h C ir. 2 Apr

. 23
, 20 18 ); Uni te d St at es v. W il ki ns , No. 16 -4 02 6, 20 18 W L 17 50 61 1 (8 th Ci r. Apr . 12 , 20 18 ); Di em er v. Uni te d S ta te s, No . 16 -3 40 3, 2 01 8 WL 16 17 84 0 (8 th Cir

. Apr . 4 , 2 01 8) ; Ro bi ne tt v. Uni te d St at es , 8 86 F.3 d 68 9 (8 th C i r

. 2 0 1 8 ), pe ti ti on fo r

cer t. f il ed , (U.S. Apr. 2 0, 2 01 8) (No. 1 7- 85 44 ).

-4

-