Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ahmad R. HUDSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-05-30
Citations: 688 F. App'x 413
Docket Number: No. 16-1751
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ahmad R. HUDSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 688
Pages: 413–414

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ahmad R. HUDSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-1751
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: January 9, 2017
Filed: May 30, 2017
Tiffany Gulley Becker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Allison Hart Behrens, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Sayler Anne Ault Fleming, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Missouri, Saint Louis, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Ahmad R. Hudson, Pro Se
Felicia Annette Jones, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Robert Wolfrum, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Saint Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant
Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Ahmad Hudson pleaded guilty to unlawfully possessing a firearm as a previously convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). At sentencing, the district court concluded that Hudson's base of fense level should be increased under USSG § 2K2.1(a)(3), because he had sustained a prior conviction for a "crime of violence." The prior conviction was for unlawful use of a weapon under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030.1(4). The court then determined that Hudson's advisory guideline range was 63 to 78 months' imprisonment and sentenced him to a term of 70 months' imprisonment.
Hudson appeals, arguing that the district court committed procedural error by counting his prior conviction as a crime of violence. In United States v. Pulliam, 566 F.3d 784, 788 (8th Cir. 2009), this court held that a conviction under § 571.030.1(4) is a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i), because it has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another. "Crime of violence" under the guidelines also includes offenses that have such an element, see USSG § 4B1.2(a)(1), so Pulliam dictates that Hudson sustained a qualifying prior conviction.
Hudson asserts that intervening Supreme Court decisions have superseded the reasoning of Pulliam, and that we should conclude under current law that his prior conviction is not a crime of violence. We rejected the same argument in United States v. Steven Hudson, 851 F.3d 807, 808-10 (8th Cir. 2017), and Hudson's contention is foreclosed by this recent decision. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.