United States v. Ellis, No. 15-1261 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his 61-month sentence after pleading guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm as a previously convicted felon. The court concluded that the district court correctly overruled defendant's objection to the district court's finding that his prior felony conviction for resisting arrest by fleeing, in violation of Mo. Rev. Stat. 575.150, was a “crime of violence” within the meaning of USSG 4B1.2(a) where the court held that a felony violation of section 575.150 is categorically a crime of violence; if there was error in applying the residual clause to defendant's prior conviction under Johnson v. United States, then the error is not “obvious” or “plain,” and relief is not warranted under the plain-error standard of review; and the court declined to use a plain error standard of review in considering his claim, raised for the first time on appeal, that the district court erred by considering his prior conviction for resisting arrest by fleeing because it was not a conviction for which he received criminal history points under USSG 4A1.1(a), (b), or (c). In this case, the sentence imposed is well within the statutory range authorized for the offense of conviction and is consistent with the court's view of the Sentencing's Commission's advice, both past and present.
Court Description: Colloton, Author, with Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err in finding that defendant's prior felony conviction for violation of Mo. Rev. Stat. Section 575.150 was a crime of violence within the meaning of Guidelines Sec. 4B1.2(a); if there was error in applying the residual clause to defendant's prior conviction under Johnson, an issue not raised below, the error is not obvious or plain and defendant is not entitled to relief under the plain-error standard of review; defendant is not entitled to plain error relief on his argument that the district court erred in considering his prior conviction for resisting arrest by fleeing because it was not a conviction for which he received criminal history points. Judge Shepherd concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.