## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 1- 25 91

__ __ __ __ __ _

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *

* Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, *

* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s

v. * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e

* East ern Dis tri ct of M is so ur i Tim ot hy G. Oss an a, *

* Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t. *

__ __ __ __ __ _

Su bm it te d: Mar ch 13 , 20 12 Fi le d: May 17, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _

Befo re MELLOY, SMITH, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _
MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg e.

In an earl ie r ap pe al

, we he ld th e go ve rn m en t fai le d t o p r o v e a pr io r Ariz on a

co nv ic ti on qu al ifi ed as a cri m e of vi ol e n c e p u r su an t to Uni te d St at es Sen te nc in g
Gui de li ne s § 2K2 .1(a )(4 )(A). See Uni te d St at es v. Oss an a, 63 8 F

. 3 d 8 95 (8 th Ci r.
20 11 ). W e rem an de d fo r res en te nc in g a n d ex pr es sl y no te d th e go ve rn m en t co ul d

ex pa nd th e reco rd wit h ad di ti on al m at eri al s co ns is te nt wit h Sh ep ard v. Uni te d St at es , 54 4 U

. S

. 1 3, 16 (2 00 5)

, to ap pl y th e m od ifi ed cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch an d de te rm in e
whi ch su bs ect io n o f th e rel ev an t Ari zo na st at ut e le d t o Os sa na 's p rio r co nv ic ti on

.On rem an d, th e go ve rn m en t in tro du ced a tra ns cri pt of a pl ea co ll oq uy fro m th e

un d e r l yi n g Ariz on a co nv ic ti on

. The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th is pl ea co ll oq uy
de m on st rat ed Oss an a ha d be en co nv ic te d pu rs ua nt to a s u b s ect io n of th e Ariz on a

st at ut e th at de fin ed a cri m e o f vi ol en ce. We affir m

.

W e se t fo rth a de ta il ed reci ta ti on of th e fact s in ou r pr io r op in io n, Oss an a, 63 8

F.3 d at 89 7– 98

, an d do no t rep eat th em he re. The on ly is su e in vo lv ed in th e pr es en t

ap pe al is whe th er th e pr io r co nv ic ti on in vo lv in g an ov eri nc lu si ve st at e st at ut e aro se
fro m a su bs ect io n of th e st at ut e th a t qu al ifi es as a "cr im e of vi ol en ce." The pr io r

co nv ic ti on was fo r Agg rav at ed Ass au lt

, Ariz

. R e v

. S t a t. § 13 -1 20 4, whi ch cro ss

refe ren ces Ariz on a's si m

pl e as sa ul t st at ut e an d se ts fo rth ag gr av at in g ci rcu m st an ces , in cl ud in g us e of "a de ad ly weap on or da ng ero us in st ru m en t." Ariz

. Rev

. St at

. § 13

- 12 04 (A)(2 ) (cro ss refe ren ci ng Ariz

. Rev

. St a t

. § 1 3

- 12 03 ). Ariz on a ch arg ed an d

co nv ic te d Os sa na cit in g t hi s ag gr av at or , and th e in st ru m en t u se d was a ve hi cl e.

The un de rlyi ng , cro ss -ref eren ced as sa ul t st at ut e m ay be vi ol at ed in se ve ral

di st in ct way s:

A. A per so n c om m it s as sa ul t b y : 1. In te nt ional ly

, know ing ly or re ck le ss ly cau si ng an y ph y si cal in jury to an ot he r pe rs on ; o r 2. In te nt io na ll y pl aci ng an ot he r pe rs on in reas on ab le

ap pr eh en si on of i m

m in en t p hysic al in

jury; or
3. Kno win gl y to uc hi ng an ot he r pe rs on wit h th e in te nt to in jure , in su lt or p ro vo ke su ch pe rs on

.

Ariz . Rev . Sta t. § 13 -1 20 3.

In th e pr io r ap pe al

, we co nc lu de d th at
, gi ve n Ariz o n a ' s in te rp ret at io ns of it s

own st at ut e, a co nv ic ti on pu rs ua nt to Sect io n 13 -1 20 3( A)(1 ) in vo lv in g an act ua l

"i nju ry to an ot he r pe rs on " bu t a m en s rea of m ere reck le ss ne ss wou ld no t qu al ify as

a cri m e of vi ol en ce. Oss an a, 63 8 F.3 d at 90 3. W e al so co nc lu de d th at a vi ol at io n of

-2

-Sect io n 13 -1 20 3( A)(3 ) in v o l vi ng to uc hi ng in te nd ed to pr ov ok e or in su lt an ot he r

pe rs on wou ld no t q u a l i f

y a s a cri m e of vi ol en ce. Id

. In ad di ti on , we di sc us se d th e

st at e of th e reco rd as to th e ab se nc e or pr es en ce of an in jury an d as to Os sa na 's

un de rlyin g m en s re a:

Here, al l th a t t h e S he pa rd -q ua li fy in g m at eri al s de m on st rat e is th at th e da ng ero us in st ru m en ta li ty in vo lv ed in Oss an a's Ariz on a co nv ic ti on was

a ve hi cl e. Qua li fy in g reco rd s do no t su gg es t whe th er an y pa rt y w as in jure d (as req ui red to pe rm it a co nv ic ti on ba se d u p o n a m en s rea of reck le ss ne ss ), wha t Oss an a's m en s rea m ay ha ve be en , or ho w pr eci se ly
Oss an a us ed th e ve hi cl e. W e can no t as su m e th e ab se nc e o f a res ul ti ng in jury (wh ic h wou ld el im in at e th e po ss ib il it y of a co nv ic ti on ba se d up on

m ere reck le ss ne ss ) be cau se th e go ve r n m en t be ars th e bu rd en of pr oo f

an d to m ak e th is as su m

pt io n wou ld be to sp ecu la te in a m an ne r ad ve rs e
to th e de fen da nt . We al so can no t as su m e an y pa rti cu la r m en s rea fro m

am on g t ho se li st ed in th e st at e st at ut e.

Id . at 9 03 –0 4.

On rem an d, it was th e go ve rn m en t's bu rd en to pr ov e Oss an a's pr io r co nv ic ti on

st em m ed fro m a vi ol at io n of a su bs ect io n qu al ifyin g as a cri m e of vi ol en ce. To m eet

th is bu rd en , th e go ve rn m en t ha d to in tro du ce qu al ifyin g st at e co ur t m at eri al s to pr ov e
th e ab se nc e of an in

jury (th ereb y el im in at in g th e po ss ib il it y of a co nv ic ti on ba se d on

m ere reck le ss ne ss whi ch is a qu al ifyin g m en s rea un d e r th e st at ut e on ly as to th e

s ub se ct io n in vo lv in g act ua l in jury) or to pr ov e th at th e pr io r co nv ic ti on in vo lv ed

pr oo f of a m en s re a g reat er t ha n re ck le ss ne ss

.

The go ve rn m en t in tro du ced a tra ns cri pt o f t h e pl ea co ll oq uy fro m Oss an a's

ch an ge -o f-p le a he ari ng in Ariz on a St at e Co ur t. The pa rti es ag ree th at th is tra ns cri pt

qu al ifi es as pe rm is si bl e Sh ep ard m at eri al fo r th e pu rp os e of an al y zi ng th e pr io r

co nv ic ti on pu rs ua nt to t h e m od ifi ed cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch

. The pl ea co ll oq uy

co nt ai ne d t he fol lo win g e xc ha ng e:

-3

-The Co ur t: Oka y. S o w h y d o n ' t yo u g o a h e a d an d te ll m e wha t ha pp en ed on or a bo ut Ju ne 24 th , 19 98 ?
Oss an a: U m, o k a y

. On Ju ne 23 rd

, I gu es s Ju ne 24 th

, I – I was i n

m y ve hi cl e. I was pa rk ed in a m ot el pa rk in g lo t tal ki ng to

a fri en d. He was le an ed up ag ai ns t th e p a ss en ge r si de of th e car. I ha d a pa ss en ge r in th e car. Two po li ce of fic ers
ap pr oa ch ed m e, on e or de red m e t o t u rn of f th e ve hi cl e. I

as ke d he why. Um

, ha d I br ok en th e la w? He sa y s no , tu rn it of f. And in th e m ean ti m e, an ot he r of fic er ap pr oa ch ed th e dr iv er's si de of th e ve hi cl e an d as ke d m e to tu rn th e car of f

an d ro ll do wn t he win do w. He ask ed m e to rol l d own th e win do w. I ro ll ed do wn m y win do w. I as ke d hi m wha t he

wan te d a n d h e s a i d

, I sa id tu rn of f th e car. He st art ed hi tt in g m y win do w wit h th e st ic k an d – a ba to n, wha te ve r. So I to ok off

m y – m y car an d I r an ov er h is bi cy cl e. Co un se l: The y were bi cy cl e co ps , You r Hon or

. Bi ke was in ba ck of

c a r . He ran ov er it at th e sa m e ti m e th e of fic er was – h a d

to jum p o ut of t he way

of t he ve hi cl e. The Co ur t: You co ul d h av e ru n o ve r an off ic er; rig ht ?
Oss an a: Uni nt en ti on al ly. I kn ow i t was n't a sm art th in g t o d o.

Bas ed on th is co ll oq uy, Oss an a arg ue d to th e di st ric t co ur t t h a t i t was no t

po ss ib le to de te rm in e whe th er an i n ju r y r e su lt ed or wha t hi s m en s rea m ig ht ha ve
be en

. The go ve rn m en t su gg es te d Oss an a was at t e mp t in g to co ll at eral ly at ta ck hi s

pr io r co nv ic ti on by as se rti ng th at no su bd iv is io n ap pl ie d. Oss an a arg ue d th at he was

no t at te m pt in g to co ll at eral ly at ta ck hi s pr io r co nv ic ti on ; he was m erel y arg ui ng th at

t h e p le a co ll oq uy pr ov id ed an in su ffi ci en t ba si s to di sc ern whi ch su bs ect io n w a s
in vo lv ed

.

The di st ric t co ur t, rev ie win g th e in it ia l reco rd an d th is ne w m at eri al

, di sa gr eed

,

co nc lu di ng , "Th e Co ur t f i n d s t h a t by a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce, whi ch I

be li ev e is th e ap pr op ria te s t a n d a r d

, t ha t

. . . th e cri m in al of fen se to whi ch he pl ed

gu il ty was su bs ect io n two as we ha ve be en refe rri ng to it ." Su bs ect io n two refe rs to

-4

-Ariz

. Rev

. St at

. § 13 -1 20 3( A)(2 ) an d de fin es a cri m e of vi ol en ce, as ex pl ai ne d in ou r

pr io r op in io n.

W e rev ie w d e no vo th e ap pl ic at io n of th e m od ifi ed cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch

. Uni te d St at es v. Lin ng ren , 65 2 F.3 d 8 6 8

, 8 7 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) ("C on se qu en tl y , th e
d i s tri ct co ur t, an d no w th is co ur t on de no vo rev ie w, m us t lo ok be y on d th e fa c t o f

co nv ic ti on

. . . an d e m

pl oy th e m od ifi ed cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch to de te rm in e whe th er [th e] pr io r co nv ic ti on res te d on th e po rti on of th e

. . . St at ut e

. . . qu al ify[in g] fo r th e

se nt en ci ng en ha nc em en t." ); Uni te d St at es v. Bo az, 55 8 F.3 d 80 0, 80 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) ("We ha ve rep eat ed ly he ld tha t w he ther a pa rti cu la r co nv ic ti on qu al ifi es as a pr ed ic at e
fel on y fo r th e pu rp os e of § 92 2( g) is a qu es ti on of la w fo r th e di st ric t co ur t." ). W he n

rev ie win g th e Sh ep ard -q ua li fy in g m at eri al s su rro un di ng a pr io r co nv ic ti on , w e

em pl oy th e pr ep on de ran ce o f t he ev id en ce st an da rd to de te rm in e th e di sc ret e

su bs ect io n of a cri m in al st at ut e at is su e. Uni te d St at es v. W il li am s, 66 4 F.3 d 71 9, 72 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) ("I f th e g ov ern m en t es ta bl is he s by a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce
th at th e pr io r fel on y co nv ic ti on was fo r a cri m e of vi ol e n c e , t h en th e § 2K2 .1(a )(3 )

se nt en ci ng en ha nc em en t ap pl ie s." ).

Here, th e reco rd sh ows th e of f i c e r w a s in fear of im

m in en t ha rm — he was
fo rced to jum

p ou t of th e way of a m ov in g ve hi cl e th at ul ti m at el y ran ov er hi s bi cy cl e.
Bas ed up on th is fact

, it is reas on ab le to in fer th at th e of fic er su cces sf

ul ly jum pe d fro m
ha rm 's way an d was no t in jure d. In th e ab se n c e of an in jury, we m

us t in fer th e

co nv ic ti on di d no t st em fro m a vi ol at io n of Ariz

. Rev

. St at

. § 13 -1 20 3( A)( 1 ) an d

th eref or e m us t h av e in vo lv ed su bs ect io n (A) (2 ).

In th e in i t i a l a p p e al , wh en th e pl ea co ll oq uy was no t a pa rt of th e reco rd an d

th e de ta il s of the of

fen se were un kn own , a co nc lu si on as to th e pr es en ce or abs en ce
of in jury wou ld ha ve am ou nt ed to na ke d an d im pe rm is si bl e sp ecu la ti on

. Here,

ho wev er, t he fact ua l d es cri pt io n s ho win g t ha t t he off ic er jum pe d o ut of h arm 's way

-5

-li fts th e fin di ng ab ov e th e le ve l of m ere sp ecu la ti on an d su pp or ts th e reas on ab le

in fere nc e th at no in

jury occu rred

.

It is im po rta nt to no te th at
, in th is c a s e , th e ap pl ic ab le st an da rd of pr oo f

m at te rs

. Th e fin di ng at is su e im pa ct s on ly th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s ran ge an d, as

su ch , r eq ui res pr oo f on ly b y a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce. Id

. Als o, we do no t

co nd uc t a rev ie w of th e st at e co ur t reco rd s in th is co nt ex t an d mak e fin di ng s

sp eci fic al ly as to th e de ta il s of th e pr io r of fen se

. Rat he r, w e r e v i e w th e reco rd s

m erel y to de te rm in e whi ch di sc ret e su bs ect io n of th e un de rlyin g cri m in al st at ut e th e

st at e rel ie d up on to se cu re th e gu il ty pl ea. Ty pi cal ly, su ch an an al y si s req ui res li tt le

fro m th e rev ie win g c ou rt i n t erm s o f in fere nc es or f act ua l d et erm in at io ns

.

Occas io na ll y , ho wev er, as in th is cas e, it wil l be ne ces sa ry to in te rp ret th e st at e

co ur t reco rd an d m ak e reas on ab l e i n f e ren ces ba se d up on th e Sh ep ard -q ua li fy in g

m at eri al s i n o r d e r t o id en ti fy th e di sc ret e st at ut or y su bd iv is io n at is su e. In ot he r

cas es , th e pa uc it y of in fo rm at io n in st at e co ur t reco rd s m ay who ll y th wart an al y si s

pu rs ua nt to th e m od ifi ed cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch

. See, e.g ., J oh ns on v. Un it ed St at es , 13 0 S. Ct . 1 26 5

, 12 73 (2 01 0) ("I t m ay well be tru e

. . . t ha t in m an y cas es st at e an d

lo cal reco rd s fro m

. . . co nv ic ti o n s w i l l b e in co m pl et e. [A]bse nc e of reco rd s wil l

of te n fru st rat e ap pl ic at io n of th e m od ifi ed cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch ."). H e r e , al th ou gh

so m e un cert ai nt y rem ai ns as to whe th er an act ua l in ju r y res ul te d fro m th e ev en ts

de sc rib ed in th e pl ea co ll oq uy, we be li ev e th at th e reco rd ad eq u a te ly sh ows by a

pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce th a t n o i n jury o ccu rred

. W e do no t su gg es t th at th e
li m it ed pl ea co ll oq uy qu o t e d a b ov e wou ld su pp or t th e sa m e fin di ng be y on d a

reas on ab le do ub t.

W e al so no te th at th e go ve rn m en t arg ue s Ariz on a's in te rp ret at io n of Ariz

. Rev

. St at

. § 13 -1 20 3( A)(2 ) req ui res pr oo f on ly of an in te nt io na l act an d no t pr oo f of a
de fen da nt 's i n t e n t to pl ace a vi ct im in fear of im m in en t bo di ly h arm

. W e reject th e

go ve rn m en t's arg um en t as an in co rrec t in te rp ret at io n of Ariz on a la w. To su pp or t it s

-6

-po si ti on , th e go ve rn m en t ci te s Ariz on a v. Dav is

, No. 2 CA-CR 20 07 -0 32 1, 20 08 W L

26 28 94 4 (Ar iz . Ct. App . Di v. 2) (u np ub li sh ed ). Dav is , h owe ve r, st an ds ne it he r fo r
th e pr op os it io n th at an y in te nt io na l act su ffi ces to pr ov e th e req ui si te in te nt no r th at

in te nt io na l act s wit h ve hi cl es are so m eh ow un iq ue

. Rat he r, Dav is ho ld s m erel y th at

t h e pa rti cu la r us e of a ve hi cl e in th at cas e su ffi ced to sh ow th e req ui si te in te nt to

m ak e a v ic ti m

fear im m in en t h arm . Id. at *2

.

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

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

-7

-