Court Opinion

ID: 9555167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-11 00:00:32.706845+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:41:34.782610
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30620      Document: 00516853659         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/10/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                                                          United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                   Fifth Circuit

                                 ____________                                    FILED
                                                                           August 10, 2023
                                  No. 22-30620                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                 ____________                                    Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Jarvis Pierre,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Western District of Louisiana
                           USDC No. 6:21-CR-263-1
                  ______________________________

   Before Richman, Chief Judge, and Jones and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Jarvis Pierre appeals his sentence of 110 months in prison for
   assaulting an officer. At issue is whether the district court erred by applying
   the sentencing guideline for Aggravated Assault instead of the guideline for
   Obstructing or Impeding Officers.         Finding no reversable error, we
   AFFIRM.

          _____________________
          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
   circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-30620      Document: 00516853659          Page: 2    Date Filed: 08/10/2023

                                    No. 22-30620

                                I. Background
          In September 2021, Pierre was awaiting sentencing in a Louisiana jail
   for a federal drug and firearm conviction. Five seconds after a jailer opened
   his cell door to deliver his daily medication, Pierre attacked, striking the
   jailer’s head and torso with his fist, throwing the jailer to the ground, and
   placing him in a chokehold before striking him some more. Pierre’s flurry of
   punches broke the jailer’s nose and knocked him temporarily unconscious.
   As a result, the jailer received medical care, including a CT scan, from a local
   emergency room.
          A jury convicted Pierre of “Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain
   officers or employees,” in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1) and (b). Relying
   upon the aggravated assault guideline at U.S.S.G. § 2A2.2, the presentence
   report (PSR) calculated Pierre’s base offense level as 14. After a three-level
   increase pursuant to § 2A2.2(b)(3)(A) because the victim sustained bodily
   injury, a two-level increase because Pierre was convicted under § 111(b), and
   a six-level increase because the victim was a corrections officer, his total
   offense level was 25. With a criminal history category of VI, the PSR
   determined that his sentencing range was 110 to 137 months of imprisonment.
          At sentencing, Pierre objected to the application of § 2A2.2 to
   determine his base offense level rather than the guideline pertaining to
   obstructing or impeding officers found in U.S.S.G. § 2A2.4.               After
   considering the statements of counsel and the sentencing factors under
   18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the district court sentenced Pierre to 110 months of
   imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Pierre filed a timely
   notice of appeal.
                                II. Discussion
          Pierre contends that the district court erred in applying § 2A2.2 rather
   than § 2A2.4. Specifically, he argues that because his underlying offense did

                                          2
Case: 22-30620      Document: 00516853659           Page: 3     Date Filed: 08/10/2023

                                     No. 22-30620

   not involve serious bodily injury, the district court erred in applying the
   aggravated assault guideline.
          This court reviews the district court’s interpretation and application
   of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error.
   United States v. Blanco, 27 F.4th 375, 382 (5th Cir. 2022). There is no clear
   error if a factual finding is plausible in light of the record as a whole. Blanco,
   Id.
          The Guidelines’ statutory index lists two possible guidelines for
   violations of 18 U.S.C. § 111: U.S.S.G. § 2A2.2 or U.S.S.G. § 2A2.4. See
   U.S.S.G. App. A. In determining which guideline provision to apply, “the
   district court must select the most appropriate section based upon the nature
   of conduct charged in the count for which the defendant was convicted.”
   United States v. Grant, 850 F.3d 209, 219 (5th Cir. 2017) (internal quotation
   marks and citation omitted). Section 2A2.4 is the guideline for obstructing
   or impeding officers and provides for a base offense level of 10.
   Section 2A2.2 is the guideline for aggravated assault and calls for a base
   offense level of 14. The Guidelines explicitly state that if the conduct
   underlying the offense constitutes aggravated assault, § 2A2.2 should be
   applied. § 2A2.4(c). “Aggravated assault” is further defined as “a felonious
   assault that involved (A) a dangerous weapon with intent to cause bodily
   injury (i.e., not merely to frighten) with that weapon; (B) serious bodily
   injury; (C) strangling, suffocating, or attempting to strangle or suffocate; or
   (D) an intent to commit another felony.” § 2A2.2, comment. (n.1) (italics
   omitted).
          Further, “serious bodily injury” is defined as “injury involving
   extreme physical pain or the protracted impairment of a function of a bodily
   member, organ, or mental faculty; or requiring medical intervention such as
   surgery, hospitalization, or physical rehabilitation.”        U.S.S.G. § 1B1.1,

                                           3
Case: 22-30620      Document: 00516853659          Page: 4   Date Filed: 08/10/2023

                                    No. 22-30620

   comment. (n.1(M)).       And strangling is “intentionally, knowingly, or
   recklessly impeding the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of a
   person by applying pressure to the throat or neck . . . .”          18 U.S.C.
   § 113(b)(4).
          The Government argues that the aggravated assault guideline was
   appropriate for two independent reasons: first, because Pierre inflicted
   serious bodily injury upon the jailer by breaking his nose and knocking him
   out; and second, because video shows Pierre attempting to strangle the jailer.
          Here, Pierre punched the jailer in the face repeatedly and appeared to
   place the jailer in a chokehold (see images below).

   The jailer was momentarily knocked out and suffered a broken nose. He was
   treated for his injuries at an emergency room. Based on these record facts,
   the district court plausibly could have found that the jailer sustained serious
   bodily injury under the Guidelines or that Pierre attempted to strangle the
   jailer. Either would support the district court’s application of the aggravated
   assault guideline.
   AFFIRMED.

                                         4