# 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- 16 37

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 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.
DeMa rk o L. Co ll in s
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 2, 2 01 8 Fil ed : Ap ril 23 , 20 18 [Un pu bl is he d]

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

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

DeMa rk o L. Co ll in s pl ead ed gu il ty to be in 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 to po ss es si on of a st ol enfir earm in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( j) an d 9 24 (a)( 2)

. The di st ric t co ur t 1

se nt en ced Co ll in s to 10 8 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t on each co un t to ru n co ns ecu ti ve ly fo ll owe d by a th ree- y ear te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. Co ll in s arg ue s th e di st ric t co ur t

erre d in ap pl y in g two se nt en ci ng en ha nc em en ts to hi s co nv ic ti on s un de r th e Uni te d St at es Sen te nc in g Gu id el in es (Gui de li ne s o r U.S.S.G.). W e aff irm.

Co ll in s arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in im po si ng a fo ur -le ve l se nt en ci ng
en ha nc em en t be cau se th e co ur t in co rrec tl y de te rm in ed th at Co ll in s’s pr io r Mi ss ou ri

co nvict io n fo r se co nd -d eg ree ro bb ery was a “ cri m e of vi ol en ce” un de r th e G uid el ine s. U.S.S.G. § 2K2 .1(a )(2 ); se e al so Mo

. Rev

. St at

. § 56 9.0 30 .1 (1 97 9)

. Thi s arg um en t 2 is for ecl os ed , ho wev er, b ecau se in Uni te d St at es v. Swo pe s, 88 6 F.3 d 66 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 18 ) (en ba nc ) we he ld th at a “ co nv ic ti on for Mi ss ou ri s eco nd -d eg ree rob be ry [i]s

a ‘vio le nt fel on y ’ un de r th e [Arm ed Care er Cri m in al Act (ACCA)].” Our pr eced en t 3 vi ews a “ vi ol en t fel on y ” un de r th e ACCA an d a “ cri m e of vi ol en ce” un de r th e Gui de li ne s as i nt erch an ge ab le

. Uni te d St at es v. Hall , 87 7 F.3 d 80 0, 80 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). The di st ric t co ur t th us di d no t err in it s ru li ng

. See Owsl ey v. Lue bb ers , 28 1 F.3 d 68 7, 69 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 02 ) (p er cu ria m ) (“ It is a card in al ru le in ou r ci rcu it th at on e pa ne l i s b ou nd by the de ci si on of a pri or pa ne l.”)

.

The Hon or ab le Gary A. Fen ne r, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.
E ff ec tiv e Ja nuary 1, 20 17 , Mi ss ou ri am en de d it s seco nd- de gr ee ro bbe ry sta tut e 2 to r e q u i re “ ph y si cal in

jury to an ot he r pe rs on .” Mo

. Rev

. St at

. § 57 0.0 25 .1. Thi s op in io n ad dr es se s on ly th e se co nd -d eg ree ro bb ery st at ut e in effe ct whe n Co ll in s was co nv ic te d i n 2 01 0.
See al so Uni te d St at es v. W il ki ns , No. 16 -4 02 6, sl ip op ., 20 18 W L 17 50 61 1, 3 — F. App ’x — (8 th Ci r. Apr

. 12 , 20 18 ); Diem er v. Uni te d St at es , No. 16 -3 40 3, sl ip op ., 2 01 8 W L 16 17 84 0, — F. App ’x — (8 th Ci r. Apr . 4 , 2 01 8) ; Ro bi ne tt v. Uni te d St at es , 88 6 F .3d 68 9 (8 th Cir . 20 18 ).
-2

-Co ll in s ne xt arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t er r e d w h e n i t ap pl ie d a th ree- le ve l

se nt en ci ng en ha nc em en t “ fo r m ul ti pl e pr io r s en te nc es .” Und er Gui de li ne s § 4 A 1.2 (a)( 1) , a pr io r se nt en ce is “ an y se nt en ce pr ev io us ly im po se d u p o n ad jud ic at io n of gu il t, whe th er by gu il t y pl ea, tri al , or pl ea of no lo co nt en de re , fo r
co nd uc t no t pa rt of th e in st an t of fen se .” If two pr io r se nt en ces were im po se d on th e
sa m e da y , ho wev er, th e se nt en ces a re no t co un te d se pa rat el y un le ss th ere was an

“ in te rv en in g a rres t” be twee n th e fir st an d se co nd of fen se

. U.S.S.G. § 4A1 .2(a )(2 ). Co ll in s arg ue s th at hi s pr io r co nv ic ti on s in Ja ck so n Co un ty, Mi ss ou ri, cas e nu m be rs 07 16 -CR- 02 97 1- 01 an d 09 16 -C R- 0472 8- 01, shou ld not ha ve be en co unt ed se pa rat el y be cau se th e st a t e c o u r t im po se d se nt en ces fo r bo th of fen se s on th e sa m e da y
. The di st ric t co ur t ru le d, ho wev er, th at an in te rv en in g arre st oc cu rred be twee n th e two in ci de nt s. Thi s fin di ng is no t cl earl y erro ne ou s. See Uni te d St at es v. Pad en , 33 0 F.3 d 10 66 , 10 67 (8t h C ir. 2 00 3) (st an da rd of r ev ie w).

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

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

-3

-